Journals / Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi / 2007 / Sayı: 18

ULUSLARARASI İLİŞKİLER TARİHİNİN YAPISÖKÜMÜ: İDEALİZM-REALİZM TARTIŞMASI

Pages
225–243
Publication Date
2007-08-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

It is, therefore, impossible to conceive the history of the discipline and current debates unless the rift between the two traditional approaches, their basic arguments, roots and actors effective up to the beginning of the 1950s are understood properly and comprehensively

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Idealism-Realism debate is the first one among the great debates in the IR as an academic field emerged after the World War I.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Known as the founding debate of the discipline, this debate has not contributed only in setting up the terminology of the field, but also determined its boundaries.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It is, therefore, impossible to conceive the history of the discipline and current debates unless the rift between the two traditional approaches, their basic arguments, roots and actors effective up to the beginning of the 1950s are understood properly and comprehensively
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:İdealizm · Realizm · Uluslararası İlişkiler

Abstract

Idealism-Realism debate is the first one among the great debates in the IR as an academic field emerged after the World War I. Known as the founding debate of the discipline, this debate has not contributed only in setting up the terminology of the field, but also determined its boundaries. Even though some argue that this debate can be depicted as an academic fiction or a reflex rather than a real theoretical debate happened between rival academicians, it has not shaped the discipline’s future only. Also, it acted a valuable reference point both for the students of international relations and policymakers. It is, therefore, impossible to conceive the history of the discipline and current debates unless the rift between the two traditional approaches, their basic arguments, roots and actors effective up to the beginning of the 1950s are understood properly and comprehensively

Özet

Birinci Dünya Savaşısonrasında özgün bir çalışma alanıolarak doğan Uluslararası İlişkiler disiplininin bir asırlık tarihinde ortaya çıkmışbüyük tartışmalardan ilki İdealizm-Realizm tartışmasıdır. “Kurucu Tartışma” olarak da adlandırılan bu tartışma, bir yandan alanın terminolojisinin yerleşmesini sağlamış, öte yandan da disiplinin sınırlarınıçizmiştir. Bu tartışma, her ne kadar gerçek bir tartışma olmaktan ziyade akademik bir fictionveya reflexolarak karşımıza çıksa da; sadece disiplinin geleceğini şekillendirmekle kalmamışhem Uluslararası İlişkiler öğrencilerine hem de politika yapımcılarına köklü bir referans noktasıolarak disiplindeki yerini almıştır. 1919-1950 yıllarıarasında etkili olan tartışmayı, tartışmanın aktörlerini, tarihini, temel argümanlarınıve iki paradigma arasındaki ayrım noktalarınıanlamaksızın disiplinin bugününde etkili olan tartışmalarıanlayabilmek ve disiplinin tarihini özümseyebilmek mümkün değildir.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÇALIŞ, Ş., ÖZLÜK, E. (2007). ULUSLARARASI İLİŞKİLER TARİHİNİN YAPISÖKÜMÜ: İDEALİZM-REALİZM TARTIŞMASI. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Sayı: 18, 225–243. https://ajindex.com/articles/721539

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (10)

  1. Ashworth, Lucian M. (2002). “Did the Realist-Idealist Great Debates Really Happen? A Revisionist History of International Relations”, International Relations, Vol. 16, No
  2. Badie, Bertrand. (2001). “Realism Under Praise or A Requiem? The Paradigmatic Debate in International Relations”, International Political Science Review, Vol. 22, No
  3. Balleck, Barry J. Beer, Francis A. (1994). “Realist/Idealist Texts: Psychometry and Semantics”, Peace Psychology Review, Vol. 1, No
  4. Banks, Michael. (1985). “The Inter-Paradigm Debate”, International Relations: A Handbook of Current Theory, (ed), M. Light, A. J. R. Groom, London: Pinter Publishers. Booth, Ken. (1991). “Security in Anarchy: Utopian Realism in Theory and Practice”, International Affairs, Vol. 67, No
  5. Bostanoğlu, Burcu. (1999). Türkiye-ABD İlişkilerinin Politikası; Kuram ve Siyasa, Ankara: İmge Kitabevi. Brooks, Thom. (2002). “Hegel’s Theory of International Politics: A Reply to Jaeger”, Review of International Studies, Vol. 28, No
  6. Brown Tindall, George. (1988). America: A Narrative History Volume 2, New York: WW. Norton Company. Bull, Hedley. (1981). “Hobbes and the International Anarchy”, Social Research, Vol. 48, No
  7. Bull, Hedley. (2001). “Theory of International Politics 1919-1969”, International Relations: Critical Concepts in Political Science Vol. I, (ed), Andrew Linklater, New York: Routledge. Burchill, Scott. (2001). “Liberalism”, Theories of International Relations, (ed), Scott Burchill, New York: Palgrave. Burchill, Scott. (2001). “Realism and Neorealism”, Theories of International Relations, (ed), Scott Burchill, New York: Palgrave. Burchill, Scott. (2005). National Interest in International Relations Theory, Gordonsville: Palgrave Macmillan. Burham, Peter. (2001). “Marx, International Political Economy and Globalisation”, Capital and Class, Vol
  8. Cable, James. (19981. “The Useful Art of International Relations”, International Affairs, Vol. 57, No
  9. Carr, Edward H. (1946). Twenty Years’ Crisis 1919-1939: An Introduction to the Study of International Relations, London: Macmillan. Carr, Edward H. (1999). Milliyetçilik ve Sonrası, Çev. Osman Akınhay, İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları. Cavallar, George. (2001). “Kantian Perspectives on Democratic Peace: Alternatives to Doyle”, Review of International Studies, Vol
  10. Cozette, Murielle. (2004). “Realistic Realism? American Political Realism, Clausewitz and Raymond Aron on the Problem of Means and Ends in International Politics”, The