This forum contrasts two perspectives regarding methodology, written by researchers with avowedly opposing epistemologies. Jeffrey Checkel represents the positivist side, with Kevin Dunn advocating post-positivism. To clarify the assumptions underpinning this juxtaposition, Audie Klotz & Cecelia Lynch revisit the characterization of this epistemological divide & suggest that it unduly overshadows significant agreement. Scholars such as Checkel and Dunn, they claim, should be able to see common ground once they understand each others' terminology. To probe this potential, Checkel and Dunn elaborate on how & why they conduct research in particular ways. Their exchange highlights some commonalities but also suggests abiding limits to the reconciliation between analyses based on causal mechanisms & those based on discursive practices. References. Adapted from the source document.