ABSTRACT
This chapter argues that Theory, despite its scientific pretensions, expresses a form of complacent idealism. It examines the implications of all this for Kenneth Waltz’s allegedly ‘problem-solving’ theory, and also argues that Waltz’s arguments regarding the virtues of contemporary bipolarity are both unsupported by the theory, and rest on extremely contentious evaluative judgements regarding the enlightened maturation of the superpowers and the stability of nuclear deterrence. Waltz posits a qualitative distinction between theories and facts, which are linked by hypotheses and laws. The ‘fuzziness’ which pervades Waltz’s discussion of the nature and role of empirical theory has severe implications for his procedures for evaluating the utility of theoretical frameworks. Waltz’s defence of the contemporary system is based on his avowedly ‘theoretical’ argument that bipolarity/duopoly promotes systemic peace and stability. Waltz may be correct in believing that both sides are deterred by this situation from rationally starting a lull-scale war.
