To Abate, Not to Abet: Modes of Inquiry in Times of Crisis.

Contemporary realism, with its enduring vision of conflicting states in anarchy, emphasizes the forces of continuity and the limits of ethical possibility in world politics. My dissertation argues that contemporary formulations of realism can neither account for politics nor guide political action. I engage in a genealogical reconstruction of the two most influential and primary exponents of 20th century realism (Hans Morgenthau and E.H. Carr) to retrieve an ethically robust, historically attentive realism capable of informing contemporary politics and scholarship. The project proceeds in two parts. The first part, "Systematic Normativity in Scientific Realism," traces the collapse of contemporary realism as a scientific project and ethical framework. Through immanent critique, I show that that the two progenitors of scientific realism, Kenneth Waltz and John Mearsheimer, fail to meet their own standards of value-neutral causal theory. Through genealogical reconstruction, I demonstrate how the conceptual and analytical components of scientific realism originate in, and work to buttress, an ultimately untenable normative Realpolitk. The second part of the project, "Critical Realism: Diagnosing Crises and Transforming Society," maps out the constellation of Morgenthau's and Carr's political philosophy, retrieving what I call their "critical realism". Apprehending a world beset by economic, social, and political crises, their political inquiry sought to illuminate the radical conceptual and concrete changes required to renew political and moral life. In addition to showing the necessary trade-off between robust ethics and politics to be illusory, I contend that critical realism offers astute warnings and constructive insights for methodological controversies and substantive research in political science and political theory. This paper, entitled "To Abate, Not to Abet: Modes of Inquiry in Times of Crisis," is excerpted from the second part of the project and examines Morgenthau's and Carr's views on scientific and historical knowledge in the context of their diagnosis of crises in 20th century political, social, and economic life. I argue that their particular understanding of crisis explains 1. why they rejected dominant modes of positivist science/history and 2. why they embraced two alternatives: ideology critique and prophetic historical inquiry. I discuss how Morgenthau's and Carr's diagnosis of crisis led them to insist on radical change in political thought and practice and how their political inquiry sought to aid this task by illuminating the necessity and nature of transformation to be undertaken. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]