ABSTRACT
A more fundamental objection is that positivism, at least in the social sciences, is unable to fulfill its promise to carry out conclusive tests. The relationship between positivism and holism is especially important for Soviet foreign policy studies. Most Sovietologists are already using a method that combines the reconstruction of Soviet thinking with a complex causal explanation of behavior. To the holist, such testing might seem beside the point, since the main thing is to demonstrate the validity of the general thesis about the rational responsiveness of Soviet policy, not to produce law-like statements about the effects of separate variables. Harry Gelman’s argument about the role of Soviet leadership politics in promoting an opportunistic, expansionist approach to detente illustrates the problem of logical underdetermination. An example is provided by explanations that consider aggressiveness in Soviet foreign policy to be rooted in the totalitarian origins of the political system.
