Belfer Center Home > Publications > Books and Book Chapters > International Security Readers > Rational Choice and Security Studies: Stephen Walt and His Critics

EmailEmail   PrintPrint Bookmark and Share

 

Rational Choice and Security Studies: Stephen Walt and His Critics

International Security Reader, page 145 pp., The MIT Press

July 2000

Authors: Michael E. Brown, Editorial Board Member and Former Co-Editor, Quarterly Journal: International Security, Owen R. Coté, Editor, International Security, Sean M. Lynn-Jones, Editor, International Security; Series Editor, Belfer Center Studies in International Security, Steven E. Miller, Director, International Security Program; Editor-in-Chief, International Security; Co-Principal Investigator, Project on Managing the Atom

Ordering Information for this publication

Belfer Center Programs or Projects: International Security

 

ABSTRACT

Formal theories and rational choice methods have become increasingly prominent in most social sciences in the past few decades. Proponents of formal theoretical approaches argue that these methods are more scientific and sophisticated than other approaches, and that formal methods have already generated significant theoretical progress. As more and more social scientists adopt formal theoretical approaches, critics have argued that these methods are flawed and that they should not become dominant in most social-science disciplines.

Rational Choice and Security Studies presents opposing views on the merits of formal rational choice approaches as they have been applied in the subfield of international security studies. This volume includes Stephen Walt's article "Rigor or Rigor Mortis? Rational Choice and Security Studies," critical replies from prominent political scientists, and Walt's rejoinder to his critics.

Walt argues that formal approaches have not led to creative new theoretical explanations, that they lack empirical support, and that they have contributed little to the analysis of important contemporary security problems. In their replies, proponents of rational choice approaches emphasize that formal methods are essential for achieving theoretical consistency and precision.

 

For Academic Citation:

Michael E. Brown, Owen R. Cote Jr., Sean M. Lynn-Jones, and Steven E. Miller, eds. Rational Choice and Security Studies: Stephen Walt and His Critics. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press, 2000.

Bookmark and Share

Contending with Terrorism: Roots, Strategies, and Responses
By Michael E. Brown, Owen R. CotÚ, Sean M. Lynn-Jones and Steven E. Miller

Do Democracies Win Their Wars?
By Michael E. Brown, Owen R. CotÚ, Sean M. Lynn-Jones and Steven E. Miller

Going Nuclear: Nuclear Proliferation and International Security in the 21st Century
By Michael E. Brown, Owen R. CotÚ, Sean M. Lynn-Jones and Steven E. Miller

Offense, Defense, and War
By Sean M. Lynn-Jones, Owen R. CotÚ, Michael E. Brown and Steven E. Miller

Offense, Defense, and War
By Michael E. Brown, Owen R. CotÚ, Sean M. Lynn-Jones and Steven E. Miller

SUBSCRIBE

Receive email updates on the most pressing topics in science and int'l affairs.

<em>International Security</em>

The winter 2013/14 issue of the quarterly journal International Security is now available!

Events Calendar

We host a busy schedule of events throughout the fall, winter and spring. Past guests include: UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, former Vice President Al Gore, and former Russian PresidentáMikhail Gorbachev.