Description

Peace scientists such as Kenneth Boulding, Ted Gurr, Thomas Schelling, and Charles Tilly were fastidious in their use of abstract concepts free of the political baggage that politicians, policymakers, and

Peace scientists such as Kenneth Boulding, Ted Gurr, Thomas Schelling, and Charles Tilly were fastidious in their use of abstract concepts free of the political baggage that politicians, policymakers, and pundits necessarily foist upon the terms in the rough and tumble world of politics. Too much contemporary peace science fails to follow their lead. This essay describes this problem and proposes a useful heuristic to help us improve.

application/pdf

Download count: 0

Details

Contributors
Date Created
  • 2015-09-01
Resource Type
  • Text
  • Collections this item is in
    Identifier
    • Digital object identifier: 10.1177/0738894215593721
    • Identifier Type
      International standard serial number
      Identifier Value
      0738-8942
    • Identifier Type
      International standard serial number
      Identifier Value
      1549-9219
    Note

    Citation and reuse

    Cite this item

    This is a suggested citation. Consult the appropriate style guide for specific citation guidelines.

    Moore, Will H. (2015). Tilting at a windmill? The conceptual problem in contemporary peace science. CONFLICT MANAGEMENT AND PEACE SCIENCE, 32(4), 356-369. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0738894215593721

    Machine-readable links