A Review on the Methodological Arguments in the Study of Comparative Politics

Mun Hee Kang

International Area Studies Review, 2000, vol. 3, issue 2, 141-177

Abstract: This paper seeks to explain three distinctive trends of methodological arguments in the contemporary study of comparative politics, which are positivists, realists, and statists. On these three approaches, there is no consensus among scholars about which one is the most appropriate to the comparative study of different nation-states. The purpose of this paper is to identify the strength and weakness in the conflicting arguments found in three approaches. This involves an overall analysis of the various ontological perspectives, different problem perceptions, and future alternatives. In this comparative review, this paper also attempts to present inherent problems in each trend.

Date: 2000
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/223386590000300208 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:intare:v:3:y:2000:i:2:p:141-177

DOI: 10.1177/223386590000300208

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in International Area Studies Review from Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().