Multidisciplinary perspectives involve the application of techniques and theories drawn from various fields. This essay will examine the benefits of this perspective, particularly on the topics of the Cold War and climate change, in two directions. First, micro and macro approaches increase the interconnected complexity of the debate. Second, incorporating both qualitative and quantitative data and evidence from multiple disciplines improves the reliability of the conclusions drawn. These benefits also reduce some of the problems observed by Professor Michael Cox in the application of social sciences, namely academic specialization and empiricism; groupthink; and the hypotheses formulated by policy makers. This essay will argue that the multidisciplinary approach is crucial for a comprehensive and effective analysis of complex global incidents. The multidisciplinary view is advantageous for its ability to use several methods simultaneously to identify the interconnected complexities behind a high-impact global event. This emerges from the analysis that attempts to explain the end of the Cold War. According to the economics discipline, the end of the Cold War is attributed to the inability of the Soviet administrative command system to compete with relatively thriving Western capitalism. The Soviets' "era of stagnation" led to their financial inability to continue the arms race, so much so that they agreed to the Reykjyavik asymmetric disarmament agreements in 1989. The failure of perestroika economic reform and the 60% decline in trade after the dissolution of Comecon also led to a growing disillusionment with Soviet authority which weakened its control. However, historical discipline has focused on Gorbachev's action and the internal forces of the party. The way international relations offers broader theoretical explanations to narrower economic phenomena in the study of collective action against climate change also reinforces this advantage. This essay also argues that using qualitative, quantitative, and normative evidence in empirical data increases the reliability of conclusions drawn and reduces the risk of groupthink. This was demonstrated through multidisciplinary data that more accurately characterized Soviet economic decline and different methods used to include non-quantifiable climate effects in the analysis of climate change. Based on these analyses, it can be concluded that the multidisciplinary perspective is crucial for a comprehensive and effective analysis of any impactful global event. Word count (excluding references): 1588