A New Approach in Explaining the Effects of Positivism in Understanding the Relationship between Politics and Space within the Scale Concept Framework

پژوهش ‎های جغرافیای سیاسی

Article 7, Volume 2, Issue 2 - Serial Number 6, July 2017, Pages 145-169   

Document Type: مقالات علمی -پژوهشی

DOI: 10.22067/pg.v2i8.74628

Author

Ehsan lashgari Tafreshi^*

Yazd University

Abstract

Extended abstract

1. Introduction

In geographic sciences, one of the most important schools of methodology is the school of positivism. This school has had a special function in conceptualizing geographic sciences, including political geography. Political geographers affected by the positivism school believed that the interactions between politics and space will lead to particular spatial form and processes which can be studied only within the framework of this school. One of the consequences of applying positivism is to create the potential for classifying and enclosing space and constructing a geographic scale based on the performance of a government or country. In this research, has been struggled to introduce a new category of how to understand the relationship between politics and geographic space in the positivism methodology within framework of scale.
2 .Method
In this research that has applied the fundamental approaches in the philosophy of geography valid documents and bibliographic sources have been used to collect data.  In this study, in the first step, the concepts of space and cognition were defined using descriptive and analytical approaches. Then, the definition of space has been accorded with characteristics of the positivism cognition school.

Results and Discussion

The conceptual content of politics has a special feature which makes it possible to achieve the recognition of space in a specific pattern of positivism. In addition, the political construction of a geographic scale of two national scale, including a state / country and transnational scale, including the transnational scale makes different patterns for studying the relationship between politics and space. The results of these approaches are as follows:
A- Political Geography as Territorial Governance
National sovereignty remains as the most influential force in knowing how national and sub-national areas operate. Because the prioritization and allocation of resources influenced by the ruling political institutions do not follow similar processes among different countries and generalization, inductive thinking about it is not feasible. Because with the change of political perspectives and with the advent of new leaders, gradually, the natural and human dimensions of the geographic space on the scale of the country are changing and evolving, this view sought to combine space studies with development topics and emphasize on the fact that spatial structures have discoverable features that can be used in spatial organization. But, one of the philosophical foundations of changes in various dimensions of space is the change and rebuilding of policies, and the replacement of new forces in decision making and implementation of these policies in all levels, especially, in the level of nation-state. This process is considered by studying political geography.
B- Geopolitics as a territoriality of sovereignty in transnational scale
In the territory of a country, the sovereignty is the highest power of ordering, which is based on the social contract theory to organize and control the territoriality behaviors of human and social classes in competition with each other. But, there is no such organizing force in the metropolitan area, and the victory in power-based competition determines the extent of state domination. In the international space, there is no such organizing force, too, and victory in competitions determines the limits of state domination. Thus, the most territoriality behaviors and objectives are organized by states. From this perspective, human-made and natural data in relations between countries can create the motivation for territoriality and these behaviors will not be stopped unless the other could be stopped from acting. Geopolitics provides the geographic framework for understanding the conflicts between countries and regional blocks and explains territoriality behaviors of countries based on natural and human geographic data, and finally, leads to studying the consequences of these processes. On the other hand, because of the geopolitical conceptual nature, geopolitical experts cannot necessarily use the empirical approach in recognizing this relationship. In other words, geopolitics in its content has not a quantitative nature and experts should use deductive approaches. Because, in recognizing the geopolitical importance of the regions, qualitative factors such as political economy, ideology and social origins of political leaders also have an effect that does not have the capacity to become quantitative indicators. Historically, the views of many geopolitical scholars have shown that their geopolitical explanations have been created by deductive approaches. Therefore, gaining more power by governments depends on how they pursue the appropriate geopolitical policies.

4. Conclusion

The findings of this research reveal that the element of geographical space has a systematic nature in the positivism, but two national and sub-national scales have different contents with transnational scale. In other words, in the context of positivism, the study of the political dimension of the geographical space is different from two national and transnational political scales. In a national scale, recognizing the relationship between politics and space within the borders of a country includes national and sub-national scales, but in the transnational scale, the relationship between sovereignty and space is the result of a kind of territorialism that exists between countries and builds geopolitical concepts and ideas. Moreover, since politics, both national and sub-national and transnational, contains elements and components that have little quantitative capability, consequently, researchers should pay more attention to positivism. Therefore, applied geopolitical studies have been more widely considered in the positivism methodology as the explanation in the methodological dimension takes on operational dimensions
 

Keywords

politics; Geographical space; Positivism; Induction; deduction

References

1. Afzali, R. & Keyani, V. (2010). Explanation the place of positivism and trans positivism in political geography and geopolitics, human geography researches, 42(72). 103-120[in Persian].

2. Afzali, R.(2017). Methodology in political geography and geopolitics, Tehran: Tehran university press. (in Persian)

3. Aleizad, E. & Sarayei, H. (2011). Government in social theories; compare study in classic sociologists view, Social science Journal, No.54, 1-50.

4. Baldwin, B. ) 1995 (. Security studies and the end of the cold war, World politics Journal, 48(1), 117-141.

5. Bassin, M. ) 1987 (. Imperialism and the nation state in fredich Ratzel’s political geography, New approaches in human geography, 11(4), 473-495.

6. Cassell, P. (2004). ‬ The Giddens reader, (H., Chavosheyan, Trans.). Tehran: Ghaghanous. (in Persian)

7. Cox, K. R (2005). Political Geography Critical Concept in the Social Sciences, London and New York: Routledge.

8. Dikshit, R. (1982). Political geography contemporary perspective, Newyork: McGraw Hill company.

9. Eftekhari, G.(2009). The failed attempt to impose a philosophical insight in the scientific method in the twentieth century, Political science research journal, 3(3). 7-45 (in Persian)

10. Filint, C. (2011). Introduction to geopolitics, 2nd edition, London: Routledge.

11. Flanagan, G. (1999). Urban sociology; image and structure, New york: allyn and bacan.

12. Ghasemi, F. (2005). Construction of the new international geopolitical system, Geopolitics quarterly, 1(2), 68-100. [in Persian]

13. Ghezelsofla, M.T. (2009). Media and the construction of national identity, politics quarterly; 49(3), 321-349. (in Persian)

14. Hafeznia, M. (2006). Principle and concept of geopolitics, Mashad: papoli publisher. (in Persian)

15. Hafeznia, M.R. & Kanyanirad, M.(2014). The philosophy of political geography, Tehran: strategic research institute,

16. Hughes, H.S. (1990). Consciousness and society: the reorientation of European social thought, Tehran: Islamic revolution press. (in Persian)

17. Johnston, R. (1991). Geography and Geographer: Anglo-American Human Geography, Fourth Edition, London: Edward Arnold.

18. Johnston, R. (2009). Spatial science, International Encyclopedia of Human geography, Vol 10, 384-395.

19. Jones, M. & Jones, R. & Woods, M. (2007). An introduction to political geography: space, place and politics, (Z., peshgahifard & R., Akbari). [ in Persian].

20. Lashgari Tafreshi, E. (2016). Political power and spatial space, Philosophical outlook of Relationship between Politic and space, Tehran: Geopolitics association press. (in Persian)

21. Lashgari, E. (2002). Worlds strategic Places and regions, Tehran: Entekhab Publisher (in Persian)

22. Lashgari, E. (2018). Theories and approaches Evolution in philosophy of geography, Yazd: Yazd university press.

23. Layder, D. (1997). Modern social theory; Key debates and new direction, London: UCL Press.

24. Mannheim, K. (2010). Essays on the sociology of knowledge, (F. Majidi, Trans.). Tehran: Sales. (in Persian)

25. Mirhydar, D. & Mirahmadi, F.(2017). Evolution of Ideas in political Geography, Tehran: Tehran university press. [ in Persian].

26. Mirhydar, D., Badei, M. & Zakie, Y. & Ahmadi, F.(2016). Reasons for the decline the quantities - spatial perspective in geopolitics, Human research quarterly, 48(1), 177-196. [ in Persian].

27. Moeni alamdari, J.(2011). New theories methodology in politics (Positivism and trans positivism), Tehran: Tehran university press.

28. Mohammadi, H. (2014). Introduction to scientific research method in geography, Tehran: Tehran University press. (in Persian)

29. Mojtahedzadeh, P. & Rabei, H. (2009). The study patterns of conflict resolution and the provision solve territorial disputes, Geopolitics quarterly, 5(1), 1-28. (in Persian)

30. Mojtahedzadeh, P. (2001). Political geography and geopolitics; Tehran: SAMT.(in Persian)

31. Murdoch, J.(2013). Post structuralism geography, (R., Afzali & M., Gharahbeygei, Trans.). Tehran: Zeytoun Sabz publisher [in Persian].

32. Murray, W. (2009). Geographies of globalization, (J., Javan & A. Abdullahi, Trans.). Tehran: Chapar publisher (in Persian)

33. O’loughlin, J. (2006). The spatial analysis in political geography; In a companion to political geography; Edited by Agnew. New York: Blackwell publishing.

34. Popper, K. R. (2000). ‎The myth of the framework: in defense of science and rationality, (A. Paya, Trans.). Tehran: Tarhe nou. (in Persian)

35. Ritzer, G. (1995). Contemporary sociological theory and its classical roots, (M., salasie, Trans.). Tehran: Scientfic- cultural publisher.

36. Rush, M. (1998). Society and Politics; (M. Sabori, Trans.). Tehran: SAMT publisher. [in Persian].

37. Sadegi, R. (2015). Introduction to contemporary philosophy of science, Tehran: SAMT publisher [in Persian].

38. Shakouei, H.(1996). New thought to philosophy of Geography, Tehran: Getashenasi publisher [in Persian].

39. Sharp, J. P. (2013). Geopolitics at the margins? Reconsidering genealogies of critical Geopolitics, Political Geography journal, Vol. 37, 20-29, doi:http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2013.04.006.

40. Soroush, A. (1996).What is science? What is philosophy? Tehran: Serat Cultural Institute [in Persian].

41. Strauss, L. (1994). What is political philosophy? and other Studies‬, (F. Rajaei, Trans.) Tehran: Scientific and Cultural institution press [in Persian].

42. Tavasouli, Gh. (2009). Theories of sociology, Tehran: SAMT. (in Persian)

43. Vasegh, M. & Narjes sadat, H. (2016). Political geography as experimental science, Human geography research, 48(2), 389- 405.

44. Vasegh, M. (2005). Philosophy of geographical place, Philosophical thought journal, 2(4), 179-202. (in Persian)

45. Vincent, A. (1996). ‎Theories of the state‬, (H., Bashiriyeh, Trans.). Tehran: Nye Publisher. (in Persian)

46. Zaki, Y. & Valigholizadeh, A. (2013). Spatial scales in political geography (concepts & Theories), Tehran: Tehran University press. (in Persian)