Search

This article presents information on the comments made by the author on the assumptions made by Bruce H. Mayhew in his description of "baseline models." It is informed that, in his definition of baseline models, Mayhew stresses on the fact that probability is constant. However, according to the author, the uniform probability assumption appears somewhat empty. " In some situations, if the model does not satisfy this condition, it can be obtained by changing the sample space. In his association with Karl Deutsch, the author discussed null models which might satisfy the Mayhew definition of a baseline model. The purpose of the work carried out by the author along with Deutsch was to get good look at the residue variance of Mayhew. M.K. Carney extends his analysis to look at changes in residuals over time as well as the grouping of factors considered by the author along with Deutsch. However, inspite of the analysis being carried out by various researchers, there is little or no development in the techniques use for the analysis of residuals.

Science walks on two legs. One leg consists of asking: How things are? This leads to observation, measurement, graphing, and statistical description. The other leg consists of asking: How things should be, on logical grounds? This leads to logical models that should become quantitatively predictive. Science largely consists of such models, tested with data. Developed science establishes not only connections among individual factors but also connections among these connections. As an illustration, I use laws about human activity I have found. But social sciences often take the lazy road of fitting raw data with a straight line or some fashionable format, unaware of the need to think and build models based on logic, as stressed by Karl Deutsch. As expounded in my Making Social Sciences More Scientific (2008) and Logical Models and Basic Numeracy in Social Sciences, www.psych.ut.ee/stk/Beginners_Logical_Models.pdf, I call for a major widening in social science methodology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article offers first a brief commentary on Karl Deutsch and his collaborators’ development of the concept of security community, before moving to a critical review of constructivist attempts by Adler, Barnett and their colleagues at resurrecting it. The article makes the case that while the serious effort to give security community a new life is laudable, the appropriation also renders the concept at once theoretically complex and methodologically superficial. Drawing constructive lessons from the previous research, it seeks to demonstrate the potential of the security communities research provided that it (1) restores the Deutschian ethos of rigorous, transparent, collective and transdisciplinary research; (2) takes seriously the challenge to the realist paradigm by zooming in and out of the modern state when thinking about security community; and (3) in addition to processes of integration investigates more thoroughly also the processes of disintegration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article, I describe Karl Deutsch’s personal and political background and career and offer an assessment of him as a scholar, teacher, and mentor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This introduction to this Special Issue of International Relations dedicated to Karl Deutsch makes the case that his scholarship was transformative in more ways than is typically recognized in the discipline. Besides being a theoretical and methodological innovator, Deutsch also envisaged that research must have transformative qualities for the future of human relations. The latter in particular deserves attention of International Relations (IR) students because it opens up possibilities for novel empirical and theoretical research of international politics. Deutsch clearly believed that social scientific research must be normatively grounded and serve normative purposes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article provides a reminiscence of Karl Deutsch as a teacher and scholar. I examine his scholarship and focus on its enduring qualities. In particular, I highlight how he was a passionate advocate of innovative approaches to enduring political problems. His comprehensive theoretical vision, with central concepts such as communication and learning, remains as inspiring as his methodological eclecticism. It offers a synthesis of traditional sociology of the Europe he had left behind with the rationalist empiricism that he encountered in America. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the development of a unified army in Bosnia and Herzegovina and its contribution to world security and peace. It looks at the security community theory coined by Karl Deutsch to explain the efforts of Bosnian politicians to bring the country into the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and eventually send troops into multi-national peace missions. It explains that by aiming to join Euro-Atlantic structures, Bosnia has become a country that exports security.

The problem of political instability is neglected in the literature on security communities. In this article I argue that domestic stability, defined as the absence of large-scale violence in a country, is a necessary condition of these communities. Domestic violence precludes the existence of security communities because it renders people and states insecure; it creates the risk of cross-border destabilization and violence; and it generates uncertainty and tension among states, inhibiting trust and a sense of collective identity. I conclude that the benchmark of a security community - dependable expectations of peaceful change - should apply as much within states as between them. This is consistent with the work of Karl Deutsch, whose pioneering concept of a security community is widely understood to mean the absence of interstate war. Deutsch, in fact, was equally concerned with large-scale internal violence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of International Political Science Review is the property of Sage Publications, Ltd. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of International Political Science Review is the property of Sage Publications, Ltd. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Presents a roundtable discussion of scholars on international law. Charlotte Ku; Paul F. Diehl; Stanley Hoffman; Karl W. Deutsch.