Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: This study tests Gottfredson and Hirschi's claim, ultimately rooted in the classical tradition, that rational choice and low self-control are jointly sufficient explanations of criminal behavior. The core hypothesis tested is that variation in low self-control explains variation in criminal behavior only by virtue of its interaction with variables that are positivistic in nature. Models specify a series of interactions between self-control and learning variables, self-control and a neuroticism measure, and self-control and an extraversion measure.

The related hypothesis that a synthesis of low self-control with positivistic variables is necessary in order to explain the joint distribution of crimes and analogous acts is also explored. Testing of the hypotheses utilizes Negative Binomial, Multiple Regression, and Bivariate Probit models estimated using STATA 9.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: What role do ideas play in the establishment and maintenance of hegemony? The proposed paper seeks to answer these questions by building upon the model of international relations (Role Realignment theory) described in International Political Science Review 24/1 (January 2003), and refined in The Precarious Balance Revisited: The War on Terrorism and System Transformation (CEISA/ISA Conference, Budapest, 26-28 June 2003). The paper will explore the proposition that this theory sheds light on the process of endogenous norm generation in international relations. The model incorporates ideas/ideology as endogenous variables alongside traditional measures of power in a closed-system model that emphasizes the process dynamics through which ideas/ideologies compete for acceptance/dominance in international relations. The four major variables (foreign policy role elements) are operationalized using metrics that can be tested historically, producing an explanatory rather than a normative theory. Findings will emphasize U.S. foreign policy role behavior and its impact on America's leading role in world affairs.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: On the premise that “political freedom ends when government can use its powers and its courts to silence its criticism” and “the presence or absence in the law of the concept of seditious libel defines the society,” this paper focuses on the “positivist, instrumentalist” interaction between press freedom and political libels in South Korea. The paper first analyzes the constitutional and statutory status of freedom of the press and reputational interests. Next, the analysis examines the judicial interpretations of the Constitution and various statutes affecting press freedom vs. reputation. Finally, the author highlights the short- and long-term implications of political libels for the freedom of the Korean press and suggests several propositions as a possible way to rethink political libels in the context of Korea’s liberal democracy.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: This paper seeks to give a rhetorical account for the construction of styles of reason. I contend that Rudolph Carnap’s monograph The Unity of Science offers a glimpse of the process of constituting the positivist style of both reasoning and of practice. Carnap’s monograph creates a new way of reasoning, and thus a new way of being scientific. The Unity of Science offers to the reader a preferred way of arranging the world, with epistemological and ontological ramifications.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: The author conducts a positivist examination of whether states regard the prohibition on mid-conflict rape as a putative rule of international law. If so, states would take measures to prevent armed regulars and irregulars from committing rape as hostilities begin, or at least investigate alleged rapes, apprehend suspects, try them in national courts or extradite them to be tried in international criminal tribunals, and punish convicted individuals after the fact. After conducting a positivist examination--i.e. looking at opinio juris and state practice--the author finds states regard the prohibition on mid-conflict rape as authoritative, given the explicit language reinforcing the prohibition in domestic statutes, military codes, and international conventions to which states give their consent. But repeated violations post-1977 (the year Additional Protocols I and II to the 1949 Geneva Conventions explicitly forbade mid-conflict rape and strengthened member states' obligation to protect women during internal and international armed conflicts) suggest the prohibition is not significantly controlling of state behavior--especially among so-called "non-Western" states. The paper then looks at how in the post-Cold War era states have increasingly consented to international organizations prosecuting cases of mid-conflict rape that states were either unable--or unwilling--to prosecute in national courts. The paper concludes by looking at a few legal theories other than positivism to see if they better determine whether the prohibition on mid-conflict rape is a putative rule of international law.