188 Notes
proofs support them; (B) Development of theories with originality. Although the meas-
urement of originality may be difficult and debatable, it is still one of the most
important characteristics of any scientific theory; and (C) Development of empirically
valid theories. Theories may be examined by assessing the correlation between the
independent variables and dependent variables, or by checking the causative logic
directly through following processes. Walt, “Rigor or Rigor Mortis?” p. 13.
- Stephen Van Evera, Guide to Methods for Students of Political Science (Ithaca,
NY: Cornell University Press, 1997), pp. 27–30. - Quantitative analysis attempts to prove correlation between independent
variables and dependent variables. It is done by analyzing a large number of test
cases, or by statistical analysis of many test cases that are grouped and studied to
assess whether the results correspond with the theory’s expectations. Qualitative
analysis attempts to prove causality between independent and dependent vari-
ables. Within it, a limited number of test cases are analyzed in order to prove the
causality between the explanatory phenomena and the explained ones, in a man-
ner that the theory predicted. Gary King, Robert O. Keohane, and Sidney Verba,
Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research (Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press, 1994), p. 5. - King, Keohane, and Verba, Designing Social Inquiry, chapter 6.
- The test cases approach is one of the best ways of examining the validity of
theories in international relations. Most theories that deal with war are examined
in the best possible manner through the test cases approach, because the inter-
national historical records of politics and diplomacy preceding war that serve as
the basis of our data are usually suitable for use for in-depth research of multiple
cases more than research of a large number of cases. Van Evera, Guide to Methods
for Students of Political Science, pp. 27–30. - Both quantitative studies and qualitative studies of social science have a dual
goal of describing and explaining. Both are essential because we cannot create a
significant causal explanation without a good description of events. A descrip-
tion usually appears first, and it loses most of the interest in it, unless it is associ-
ated with a number of causative relations. It is difficult to develop explanations
before something is known about the world, but the connection between descrip-
tion and explanation is two-way. Sometimes our explanations lead us to look for
descriptions of different parts of the world, and sometimes our descriptions may
lead us to new causal explanations. King, Keohane, and Verba, Designing Social
Inquiry, p. 34. - The attempt not to be satisfied with some a posteriori explanations of
events but also present an a priori prediction of them draws me into the heart of
the existing debate in theoretical research of international relations concerning the
importance of observing events compared with explaining them. The theory that
has been developed in the current study argues that Waltz is right, and an explan-
ation is a significant component of a theory. However, according to the current
study, a theory that cannot predict anything based on its assumptions is an insuf-
ficient one. Therefore, the theory that is being developed in the book is not satisfied
with describing the events, but also argues that it can offer an explanation as to
why events occur in the way they do with regard to the two dependent variables
that are being assessed in the study.