This paper constitutes a chapter of the author's monograph entitled Epistemic Forces in International Law (Edward Elgar 2015). After formulating some general considerations on the relationship between theory and methodology, it builds on the idea that methodological choices are most conducive to the persuasiveness of legal arguments and explores the social constraints on methodological choices in international law (I). The paper then turns more specifically to international law and offers a handful of critical observations on methodological debates in contemporary international legal studies (II). In doing so, it revisits some of the methodological postures revered and venerated by international lawyers today: induction, the idea of system, the so-called turn to empiricism, interdisciplinarity and multidisciplinarity, the abiding (need for) methodological revolution, pluralism and methodological perspectivism. It ends with a few observations on deconstruction, structuralism and the critical attitude in international legal studies.
Tuesday, January 19, 2016
Jean d'Aspremont (Univ. of Manchester - Law; Univ. of Amsterdam - Law) has posted Methodology (in Jean d'Aspremont, Epistemic Forces in International Law - Foundational Doctrines and Techniques of International Legal Argumentation, pp. 177-199, 2015). Here's the abstract: