國立臺灣大學政治科學論叢

Abstract / Chinese PDF Download

Thomas Kuhn’s concept of scientific revolutions has created a common beliefin the field of international relation that one side will eventually triumph, and thatthe  triumphant  field  will  evolve  as  a  coherent  discipline  based  on  the  superiorcontributions  of  the  winning  paradigm.  In  contrast,  I  see  the  discipline  as  beingconstantly engaged in the debate between paradigms and theories. The progress ofscience  in  the  field  of  international  relations  is  a  function  of  these  disagreements,not   a   truth   held   by   individual   paradigm.   Each   paradigm   with   its   variousfundamental  assumptions  sees  a  side  of  reality  that  is  important  but  can  only  bedepicted from its own approach, not transformed into the other, or subsumed intosome  grand  synthesis.  Thomas  Kuhn’s  concept  of  scientific  revolutions,  whichallows  only  one  paradigm  in  the  field  at  a  time,  is  not  plausible  in  the  field  ofinternational  relations  because  this  would  be  the  equivalent  of  asking  us  to  use  amagnifier  or  telescope  alone  for  nature  research  conducted  in  nature;  instead,  theapplication  of  constant  competition  among  approaches  to  international  relationsprovides different dimensions and bring us closer to the reality that we are seeking.The progress in science comes from constant competition in approaches, with theirinflexibility  and  rigid  hardcore  assumptions  brought  into  question,  resulting  in  aarray  of  flexible  and  amended  auxiliary  assumptions.  In  a  nutshell,  not  only  doesconstant competition among approaches contribute to the progress of science, it alsoreduces the tension between material and ideational factors in the field.