"Rigor or Rigor Mortis? Rational Choice and Security Studies"
Journal Article, International Security, volume 23, issue 4, pages 5-48
Spring 1999
Author: Stephen M. Walt, Robert and Renée Belfer Professor of International Affairs; Faculty Chair, International Security Program
Belfer Center Programs or Projects: International Security; Quarterly Journal: International Security
ABSTRACT
In recent years rational choice theory has experienced a surge in popularity among political scientists. Its usefulness, however, remains highly controversial. In our lead article, Stephen Walt of the University of Chicago argues that the outcome of this debate will have deep and long-lasting consequences for scholarly discourse. Given that the stakes are so high, Walt contends that if rational choice theory is to achieve general acceptance, it must be "precise, logically consistent, original, and empirically valid." Applying these criteria to several prominent formal theory works in security studies, Walt concludes that in general rational choice methods fail to offer new insights into the study of security issues.
- waltvol23no4.pdf (265K PDF)
For more information about this publication please contact the IS Editorial Assistant at 617-495-1914.
For Academic Citation:
| MOST VIEWED PUBLICATIONS | POLICY BRIEF: AUTO EMISSIONS |
|---|---|
Policy Options for Reducing Oil Consumption and Greenhouse-Gas Emissions from the U.S. Transportation Sector The goal of this paper is to contribute to the current policy debate about how to effectively limit or reduce oil consumption and greenhouse gas emissions from the U.S. transportation sector. |
