Democracy and International Relations: Critical Theories/Problematic Practices. Edited by Hazel Smith. New York: St. Martin's, 2000. 278p. $69.95. - Critical Theory and World Politics. Edited by Richard Wyn Jones. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 2001. 259p. $53.00.

2001 ◽  
Vol 95 (3) ◽  
pp. 773-774
Author(s):  
David G. Becker
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Critical Theory ◽  
International Relations ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Critical Theories

International Relations and the Challenge of Postmodernism: Defending the Discipline. By D. S. L. Jarvis, Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 2000. 288p. $34.95.

2001 ◽  
Vol 95 (1) ◽  
pp. 259-260
Author(s):  
Jeffrey W. Taliaferro
Keyword(s):  
South Carolina ◽  
International Relations ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Columbia University ◽  
University Of South Carolina ◽  
New Politics ◽  
The Past ◽  
Critical Theories ◽  
Marginalized Groups ◽  
Sociological Approaches

Over the past twenty years, the so-called third debate, or the constructivist turn in international relations theory, has elic- ited a great deal of attention. Various critical theories and epistemologies-sociological approaches, postmodernism, constructivism, neo-Marxism, feminist approaches, and cul- tural theories-seem to dominate the leading international relations journals. Postmodernism (also called critical theo- ry), perhaps the most radical wave of the third debate, uses literary theory to challenge the notion of an "objective" reality in world politics, reject the notion of legitimate social science, and seek to overturn the so-called dominant dis- courses in the field in favor of a new politics that will give voice to previously marginalized groups.

A Case against the Constructivist–Critical Theory Synthesis

2019 ◽  
pp. 122-146
Author(s):  
J. Samuel Barkin ◽  
Laura Sjoberg
Keyword(s):  
Critical Theory ◽  
International Relations ◽  
International Relations Theory ◽  
The Core ◽  
Critical Theories

This chapter builds on the understandings of constructivist and critical International Relations theories laid out in the book so far to make an argument that constructivisms and critical theories are not the same thing, naturally aligned, or necessarily productive bedfellows. Furthermore, there are both analytical and political downsides to the constructivist/critical theory nexus, which are evident in work in international relations that pairs the two unreflectively. In fact, many of the intersections between constructivisms and critical theories in the current International Relations theory literature are contrived at the expense of some or even most of the core tenets of either theory. This chapter suggests that the “end of International Relations” and the lost, confused nature of International Relations theory (particularly progressive International Relations theory) can find their origins in the underspecification and overreached application of pairings between constructivisms and critical theorizing in International Relations. These implications make it necessary to critically evaluate figurations of constructivist and critical International Relations.

scholarly journals Interlocuting classical realism and critical theory: Negotiating ‘divides’ in international relations theory

2016 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hartmut Behr ◽  
Michael C Williams
Keyword(s):  
Critical Theory ◽  
International Relations ◽  
International Politics ◽  
International Relations Theory ◽  
Critical Theories ◽  
History Of ◽  
Common Problems ◽  
Classical Realism

The history of the discipline of International Relations is usually narrated as a succession of theories that would pursue different ontologies and epistemologies and focus on different problems. This narrative provides some structure to a multifaceted field and its diverse discussions. However, it is also highly problematic as it ignores common problems, intersections and mutual inspirations and overemphasizes divides over eventual commonalities. Rather than such overemphasis, we suggest instead negotiating between ‘IR theories’ and elaborating their shared foci and philosophies of science in order to provide new perspectives on and approaches to international politics. We here negotiate between the two theoretical movements of classical realism and critical theories that are typically treated as opposites, yet which nonetheless are characterized by shared concerns about political and social crises, modernity and humanity.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document