scholarly journals The art of aiming at a moving target: A critique of Lechner and Frost’s Practice Theory and International Relations

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 183-198
Author(s):  
NORA STAPPERT

Abstract:How can we account for the normative dimension of international practices? Silviya Lechner and Mervyn Frost’s Practice Theory and International Relations answers this question by proposing, with a considerable degree of epistemological sophistication, what the authors call ‘normative descriptivism’, which they combine with a focus on ‘macro practices’. In this contribution, I start by examining the authors’ engagement with IR’s practice turn, and the insights this engagement may offer on the underlying objective of their approach. I then turn to Lechner and Frost’s decision to eclipse history. The contribution concludes by using the evolution of international law as a cursory illustration of the types of analyses Lechner and Frost’s approach would lead to. It thereby emphasises potential challenges inherent in the authors’ combination of internalism as rooted in individual self-consciousness and a focus on ‘macro practices’, including the possibility that it might limit the potential to critically question the standard that becomes identified as universal.

Author(s):  
Ian Hurd

This chapter presents an account of the international rule of law that reflects the particular dynamics of international politics, drawing on legal realism and practice theory in international relations (IR). On this reading, the international rule of law is a social practice that states and others engage in when they provide legal reasons and justifications for their actions. The goal may be either political legitimation for oneself or delegitimation of adversaries. This sort of use of international law both relies on and reinforces the idea that states should act lawfully rather than unlawfully. The priority of lawfulness is taken for granted. The chapter then outlines an approach which helps to make sense of international law's contribution to contemporary disputes and crises.


2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-97 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Joseph ◽  
Milja Kurki

This paper argues that the current calls for a practice turn in International Relations (IR) while positive in many respects, are problematic and potentially limiting because they are premised on a confused understanding of the role of philosophy and realist philosophy in particular and a restricted view of the role of sociological investigation. This arises from the problematic tendency to lapse into advocacy of an anti-realist philosophical and sociological imagination. We suggest that the problems that practice theorists point to should lead not to knee-jerk anti-realism but rather can motivate a reinvigorated conversation with realism. This entails revisiting the role of philosophy, realism, and sociology in the study of practices. We argue that far from being antithetical to practice theory, a reconsideration of realist philosophy helps make sense of the role of practice and provides those advocating practice theory with better tools to deal with the challenges which motivated the development of these theoretical stances. Reconsidering realism entails, however, a reconsideration of a wider social ontology within which practice takes place, and openness to the role of philosophical and theoretical abstractions in teasing out the role of practice.


2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 212-219
Author(s):  
AMY SKONIECZNY

Abstract:Practice Theory and International Relations will challenge all you’ve come to know about the practice turn in international relations. It will ask you to question how you define practices and call for more precision. It will challenge your starting point of ground-up actions in everyday life and look at practices from above. It will push you to rethink your empirical methodology and call out sociological approaches as misconceived. And yes, it will ask you to reread Hegel and bring philosophy back in to your practice theorising. In short, it will make a lonely, and for many, unwanted call for a U-turn in the field. In this review, I’ll take up this call for a U-turn back to philosophical foundations, and ask what is gained and what is lost in rethinking practice theory from a philosophical perspective.


2018 ◽  
Vol 49 (4) ◽  
pp. 429 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jutta Brunnée ◽  
Stephen J Toope

Drawing on the practice-turn in constructivism and in international relations (IR) theory more generally, we argue that a particular approach to managing stability and change is inherent in, and indeed characteristic of, legality and the rule of law in international as in domestic law. Our "interactional law" framework places particular emphasis on what we call the "practice of legality". This concept is central to understanding how law can both enable and constrain state actions, and why international law is a distinctive language of justification and contestation. In turn, the focus on stability and change is helpful because it directly confronts some of the persistent doubts and assumptions about international law, in particular in relation to international politics. Our work is animated by the intuition that the dominant views in IR and international law scholarship underestimate international law's capacity to mediate stability and change, in part because they focus on the surface of law (treaties, statutes and so on) and external factors (interests, enforcement). They neglect the deeper structure of what makes norms "law", and the distinctive practices that account for both its relative stability and its capacity for change.


2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 140-165
Author(s):  
Catriona Standfield

International Relations has developed an exciting new research agenda on diplomatic practice, drawing largely on the theories of Pierre Bourdieu. However, it largely ignores Bourdieu’s theory of patriarchy, as well as extensive feminist Bourdieusian analysis. These are analytical tools that can be used to understand how diplomacy reproduces itself as a masculinized field. They are ‘practice theory’ as well and should be incorporated into our research on diplomatic practice. My aims here are to recover feminist practice theory for a diplomatic studies audience and to indicate how we can develop an interdisciplinary research agenda on gender and diplomacy. The first part of the article provides an overview of practice theory in diplomatic studies and discusses Bourdieu’s overlooked contributions regarding gender. I then use Bourdieu’s ‘thinking tools’ of field, habitus and practice to examine diplomacy and gender using examples drawn from the literature, as well as from some primary sources. Throughout, I show how feminist sociologists have developed his ideas to create sophisticated approaches to studying the persistence of patriarchy. This does not capture all the ways in which diplomacy is gendered, but these tools reveal the limitations in our current understanding of diplomatic practices. I conclude with suggestions for future interdisciplinary research that takes gender seriously.


2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 169-182
Author(s):  
MAREN HOFIUS

Abstract:In their ground-breaking philosophical investigation of the ‘practice turn’ Lechner and Frost prompt a standpoint debate in international relations theory, which touches upon the relationship between practice theory and its subject matter. Lechner and Frost decidedly opt for an internal standpoint, which promises to understand a social practice in terms of the meaning-in-use of its participants. This article argues that the internalist promise will ultimately remain unfulfilled, however, for the aim of collapsing the distinction between the ‘language of action’ and ‘language of observation’ is epistemologically impossible. Taking such an ‘internal’ perspective not only underestimates the problem of the double hermeneutic. It also disregards the gap between theory and practice. Any social enquiry that fails to acknowledge this gap inevitably becomes externalist, for it misses to reflect on its own normative presuppositions. The way ahead is to address this gap reflexively by way of a triple hermeneutics that is bolstered by abductive reasoning.


2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-71
Author(s):  
Devi Yusvitasari

A country needs to make contact with each other based on the national interests of each country related to each other, including among others economic, social, cultural, legal, political, and so on. With constant and continuous association between the nations of the world, it is one of the conditions for the existence of the international community. One form of cooperation between countries in the world is in the form of international relations by placing diplomatic representation in various countries. These representatives have diplomatic immunity and diplomatic immunity privileges that are in accordance with the jurisdiction of the recipient country and civil and criminal immunity for witnesses. The writing of the article entitled "The Application of the Principle of Non-Grata Persona to the Ambassador Judging from the Perspective of International Law" describes how the law on the abuse of diplomatic immunity, how a country's actions against abuse of diplomatic immunity and how to analyze a case of abuse of diplomatic immunity. To answer the problem used normative juridical methods through the use of secondary data, such as books, laws, and research results related to this research topic. Based on the results of the study explained that cases of violations of diplomatic relations related to the personal immunity of diplomatic officials such as cases such as cases of persecution by the Ambassador of Saudi Arabia to Indonesian Workers in Germany are of serious concern. The existence of diplomatic immunity is considered as protection so that perpetrators are not punished. Actions against the abuse of recipient countries of diplomatic immunity may expel or non-grata persona to diplomatic officials, which is stipulated in the Vienna Convention in 1961, because of the right of immunity attached to each diplomatic representative.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document