Show simple item record Ruzicka, Jan 2015-05-27T21:01:47Z 2015-05-27T21:01:47Z 2014-09-01
dc.identifier.citation Ruzicka , J 2014 , ' A fetish for measurement? Karl Deutsch in the second debate ' International Relations , vol. 28 , no. 3 , pp. 367-384 . en
dc.identifier.issn 0047-1178
dc.identifier.other PURE: 5776666
dc.identifier.other PURE UUID: 61022dd2-1f27-4b8a-a8ab-54704bd82226
dc.identifier.other WOS: 000342832900008
dc.identifier.other Scopus: 84911973852
dc.identifier.other 2160/28993
dc.description.abstract This article begins by asking why Karl Deutsch never directly intervened in what has come to be known in the field as the second debate. This point of departure is used to outline Deutsch's views on the purpose of knowledge. It is apparent that Deutsch was unwilling to make the distinction between the traditional and scientific approaches, which stood at the heart of the debate started by Hedley Bull. Deutsch's position tried to embrace both approaches, because they were necessary in order to answer the big and important questions he asked. Deutsch also rejected the notion that the scientific approach could be devoid of normative concerns. Finally, the article argues that Deutsch keenly adopted methods connected with the scientific approach because he believed they made it possible to spot new patterns which might hold novel answers to the profoundly normative question of humankind's survival. en
dc.format.extent 18 en
dc.language.iso eng
dc.relation.ispartof International Relations en
dc.rights en
dc.subject Hedley Bull en
dc.subject international relations en
dc.subject Karl Deutsch en
dc.subject knowledge en
dc.subject second debate en
dc.subject POLITICAL-THEORY en
dc.title A fetish for measurement? Karl Deutsch in the second debate en
dc.type /dk/atira/pure/researchoutput/researchoutputtypes/contributiontojournal/article en
dc.description.version authorsversion en
dc.contributor.institution Department of International Politics en
dc.description.status Peer reviewed en

Files in this item

Aside from theses and in the absence of a specific licence document on an item page, all works in Cadair are accessible under the CC BY-NC-ND Licence. AU theses and dissertations held on Cadair are made available for the purposes of private study and non-commercial research and brief extracts may be reproduced under fair dealing for the purpose of criticism or review. If you have any queries in relation to the re-use of material on Cadair, contact

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search Cadair

Advanced Search