DEBAT KETIGA: Memikirkan Kembali Keilmuan Hubungan Internasional
Global: Jurnal Politik Internasional, ISSN: 1411-5492, Vol: 9, Issue: 2, Page: 187-207
2007
- 597Usage
- 13Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage597
- Abstract Views404
- Downloads193
- Captures13
- Readers13
- 13
Article Description
This article will argue that Third Debate is the 'revolution turn' in the study of international relations. There are some explanations to conduct this argument: the description of the history of international relations thought and epistemological problem. This illustration will lead us to understand that there is a deeply dynamic debate in philosophy circumstances. We can not close the eyes to this debate otherwise we will be stucked and trapped in the dogmatism, stagnatism and ideology. Epistemological problem of philosophy is one of the foundations of the entire big problem that should be discussed. From epistemological scrutiny, this article believes in Smith illustration that the variety of epistemological types will solve the problem of dog matism, stagnatism and ideology in the study of international relations. This 'revolutions turn' will achieve variety of truth, a wisdom, and a freedom from (of) dogmatism, stagnatism and ideology in the study of inter national relations.
Bibliographic Details
http://global.ir.fisip.ui.ac.id/index.php/global/article/view/267; http://global.ir.fisip.ui.ac.id/index.php/global/article/viewFile/267/179; http://dx.doi.org/10.7454/global.v9i2.267; https://scholarhub.ui.ac.id/global/vol9/iss2/5; https://scholarhub.ui.ac.id/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1089&context=global; https://dx.doi.org/10.7454/global.v9i2.267
Universitas Indonesia, Directorate of Research and Public Service
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know