The debate on how neoclassical realism (NCR) has fared as a new brand of realism and supposedly a more rigorous approach towards foreign policy has become increasingly acerbic. Most NCR critics have challenged NCR’s epistemological positions, and few have scrutinised NCR’s methodological practice. This essay seeks to fill the void and focuses on the latter. My aim is both critical and constructive. Because NCR’s mainstay method is comparative case studies (CCSs), I first examine how NCR has practiced this method. I argue that NCR has been saddled with several key shortcomings when doing CCSs. Drawing from the extensive new qualitative methodology literature, I propose several remedies corresponding to the shortcomings. Fixing these shortcomings will allow NCR to advance more valid theories and move towards better theoretical synthesis. I then highlight qualitative comparative analysis as a very useful tool for NCR. Finally, I address a common criticism against NCR, that is, with numerous variables, NCR lacks theoretical synthesis and hence a theoretical core. I accordingly advance a preliminary framework for possible theoretical synthesis.

中文翻译：

---

新古典现实主义：方法论批评和补救措施

关于新古典现实主义（NCR）如何作为一种新的现实主义品牌以及所谓的更严格的外交政策方法的争论变得越来越尖锐。大多数 NCR 批评者都对 NCR 的认识论立场提出了质疑，但很少有人仔细审视 NCR 的方法论实践。本文旨在填补这一空白并重点关注后者。我的目标既具有批判性又具有建设性。由于 NCR 的主要方法是比较案例研究（CCS），因此我首先研究 NCR 是如何实践这种方法的。我认为 NCR 在进行 CCS 时存在几个关键缺点。根据大量的新定性方法论文献，我针对这些缺点提出了几种补救措施。解决这些缺陷将使 NCR 能够提出更有效的理论并走向更好的理论综合。然后我强调定性比较分析是 NCR 的一个非常有用的工具。最后，我提出对NCR的一个普遍批评，即NCR变量众多，缺乏理论综合，因此缺乏理论核心。因此，我提出了一个可能的理论综合的初步框架。