Please write a review of Stephen Krasner’s and Cynthia Enloe’s contributions in Smith, Booth & Zalewski (eds.) International Theory: Positivism and Beyond, pp. 108-27, 186-202. (I will attach the readings) The review MUST address the following: • How do Krasner’s and Enloe’s definition of ‘the political’ differ? • How would you relate their competing definitions of ‘the political’ to contrasting research methods and technique? • Reflecting on Krasner’s and Enloe’s arguments, do you think that political phenomena can be objectively understood, or do they tend to be open to different interpretations? ALSO the review must compare the following: • THE KEY QUESTION WHICH CONCERNS THE AUTHOR IS: • THE MOST IMPORTANT INFORMATION (EVIDENTIAL SUPPORT) IS: • THE MAIN CONCLUSIONS ARE: • THE KEY CONCEPTS WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND IN THIS ARTICLE ARE AND BY THESE CONCEPTS THE AUTHOR MEANS: • THE MAIN ONTOLOGICAL AND EPISTEMOLOGICAL ASSUMPTIONS UNDERLYING THE AUTHOR’S THINKING IS(ARE): • WHAT METHODOLOGICAL CONSEQUENCES FOLLOW FROM TAKING THE AUTHOR’S LINE OF REASONING SERIOUSLY AND WHAT CONSEQUENCES IF IGNORED: • THE MAIN POINT(S) OF VIEW PRESENTED IN THIS ARTICLE IS(ARE):
Call Us: USA +1 862 207 3288