The mother of all isms: Causal mechanisms and structured pluralism in International Relations theory

2013 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 459-481 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Bennett
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Scientific Realism ◽  
International Relations Theory ◽  
Research Field ◽  
Philosophical Foundation ◽  
Promising Alternative ◽  
Causal Mechanisms ◽  
Middle Range ◽  
The Social

Theorizing under the rubric of paradigmatic ‘isms’ has made important conceptual contributions to International Relations, but the organization of the subfield around these isms is based on flawed readings of the philosophy of science and has run its course. A promising alternative is to build on the philosophical foundation of scientific realism and orient International Relations theorizing around the idea of explanation via reference to hypothesized causal mechanisms. Yet in order to transform the practice of International Relations theorizing and research, calls for ‘analytic eclecticism’ must not only demonstrate that scientific realism is a defensible epistemology amenable to diverse methods; they must provide a structured and memorable framework for diverse and cumulative theorizing and research, field-wide discourse, and compelling pedagogy. I Introduce a ‘taxonomy of theories about causal mechanisms’ as a structured pluralist framework for encompassing the theories about mechanisms of power, institutions, and legitimacy that have been providing the explanatory content of the isms all along. This framework encourages middle-range or typological theorizing about combinations of causal mechanisms and their operation in recurrent contexts, and it offers a means of reinvigorating the dialogue between International Relations, the other subfields of political science, and the rest of the social sciences.

Relations, Human and Non-human

2020 ◽  
pp. 106-135
Author(s):  
Milja Kurki
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Social Theory ◽  
International Relations Theory ◽  
Critical Social Theory ◽  
The Social ◽  
Critical Social

This chapter argues for an extension of how we think relationally via relational cosmology. It places relational cosmology in a conversation with varied relational perspectives in critical social theory and argues that specific kinds of extensions and dialogues emerge from this perspective. In particular, a conversation on how to think relationality without fixing its meaning is advanced. This chapter also discusses in detail how to extend beyond discussion of ‘human’ relationalities towards comprehending the wider ‘mesh’ of relations that matter but are hard to capture for situated knowers in the social sciences and IR. This key chapter seeks to provide the basis for a translation between relational cosmology, critical social theory, critical humanism and International Relations theory.

Paradigms of Cognition in Security Sciences

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-21
Author(s):  
Andrzej Glen
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
International Relations ◽  
International Relations Theory ◽  
Security Studies ◽  
Spatial Context ◽  
Ontological Approach ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Subject

The article outlines difficulties related to the paradigm of cognition in security sciences, which have been generalised by asking about the paradigm that allows to study security of various entities and to obtain progress of knowledge about this fragment of reality. Then, a set of paradigms typical for the social sciences, disciplines: political and administrative sciences, international relations theory sub-discipline: security studies and management and quality sciences were analysed and evaluated using a system of hypothetical and assertion-deductive methods. The subject, time and spatial context of security of entities, the subject scope of security sciences and the ontological approach to the understanding of beings in the reality of security of entities were outlined. The usefulness of analysed and evaluated paradigms in cognition of security was assessed in this context. Finally, a complementary paradigm of cognition in security sciences was proposed and its usefulness in relation to multi-paradigmatic cognition was demonstrated.

Putting the state in its place: the critique of state-centrism and its limits

2003 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 521-541 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hannes Lacher
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Social Relations ◽  
International Relations Theory ◽  
The State ◽  
Spatial Transformation ◽  
Crucial Aspect ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Way

The critique of state-centrism is a crucial aspect of the restructuring of International Relations theory, widely seen as a precondition for the conceptualisation of international transformation. In this article, I argue that the terms on which this critique is framed lead to claims which are both too sweeping in their implications for a transformation to a post-Westphalian system, and not radical enough with respect to the Westphalian period itself. The critique of state-centrism is premised on the assumption that modernity was a territorial order in which states contained ‘their’ societies. But modern social relations always included global dimensions. If the modern social sciences discounted these global aspects of modernity, the way forward for the social sciences, and IR in particular, cannot be in embracing the notion of a contemporary shift from the national to the global, but in a reconsideration of modernity itself. Just as the new globalism is inadequate as a basis for understanding our supposedly postmodern times, so nation-statism was always defective as a basis for understanding modernity. I argue that the notion of a national/global dialectic provides a better basis for understanding the current socio-spatial transformation.

scholarly journals The new institutionalism and international relations: A step forward

2011 ◽  
Vol 63 (3) ◽  
pp. 343-358
Author(s):  
Rudy Baker
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Political Science ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
New Institutionalism ◽  
Institutional Analysis ◽  
International Relations Theory ◽  
The Social ◽  
Key Variables ◽  
The 1960S

The behavioral revolution of the 1960s which engulfed the social sciences, and particularly Political Science and Sociology, led to a large-scale disinterest in the study and structure of institutions. The 1980s saw a new movement emerge upon the social sciences, which stressed the centrality of institutional analysis in the study of politics and society and resurrected the study of institutions as key variables. Dubbed the New Institutionalism, this movement would have profound effects on the direction of research in Political Science and Sociology. Unfortunately, the New Institutionalist movement has been largely ignored by International Relations theorists and practitioners, even though it has generated both a useful toolkit of methods, and a rich source of findings that could be of much use to International Relations theory.

The Ontological Fallacy: a rejoinder on the status of scientific realism in international relations

2009 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 371-395 ◽  
Author(s):  
FRED CHERNOFF
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Scientific Realism ◽  
Physical Science ◽  
Recent Article ◽  
Critical Realism ◽  
Scientific Realist ◽  
Critical Realist ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Status

AbstractThis article argues that scientific and critical realism have embraced several mistaken claims, among them that social science enquiry cannot proceed unless the theoretical objects of study are specified in advance. The article argues, rather, that although pre-scientific, observable objects and events must be specified from the outset, theoretical objects come to our attention only in the course of formulating theories. The article advances an alternative to scientific realist and critical realist foundations, namely, causal conventionalism, which is an adaptation to the social sciences of several elements of Pierre Duhem's conventionalist account of physical science. The article argues that major goals of theorising that scientific realism and critical realism seek to fulfill are better satisfied by the conventionalist alternative. In an effort to clarify some important issues, the article identifies and responds to a series of related criticisms of my views offered by Colin Wight in his recent article ‘A Manifesto for Scientific Realism in IR: Assuming the Can-Opener Won't Work!’ in ‘Millennium’, and in his book, Agents, Structures and International Relations: Politics as Ontology.1

Comparative Area Studies

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Köllner ◽  
Rudra Sil ◽  
Ariel I. Ahram
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Comparative Method ◽  
Area Studies ◽  
Middle Range ◽  
The Social ◽  
Small N ◽  
Scholarly Discourse ◽  
Science Disciplines

Two convictions lie at the heart of this volume. First, area studies scholarship remains indispensable for the social sciences, both as a means to expand our fount of observations and as a source of theoretical ideas. Second, this scholarship risks becoming marginalized without more efforts to demonstrate its broader relevance and utility. Comparative Area Studies (CAS) is one such effort, seeking to balance attention to regional and local contextual attributes with use of the comparative method in search of portable causal links and mechanisms. CAS engages scholarly discourse in relevant area studies communities while employing concepts intelligible to social science disciplines. In practice, CAS encourages a distinctive style of small-N analysis, cross-regional contextualized comparison. As the contributions to this volume show, this approach does not subsume or replace area studies scholarship but creates new pathways to “middle range” theoretical arguments of interest to both area studies and the social sciences.

International Relations an a World of Revolutionary Change

1949 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 272-276 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles Easton Rothwell
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
New York ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Collaborative Research ◽  
Practical Experience ◽  
Revolutionary Change ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Carnegie Corporation ◽  
The Social ◽  
Wartime Experience

A PROJECT of collaborative research concerning major world trends affecting international relations has been launched this year at the Hoover Institute and Library. This project has been made possible by a three-year grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York.1Beneath the original planning for the project lay the conviction born of wartime experience, that a deeper understanding of the dynamics of international relations could be obtained by pooling the contributions of the social sciences and related disciplines and by taking account of practical experience in the international field. The need for new and more penetrating approaches to international relations had been put by Arnold Toynbee in a few challenging words: “There is nothing to prevent our Western Civilization from following historical precedent, if it chooses, by committing social suicide. But we are not doomed to make history repeat itself; it is open to us through our own efforts, to give history, in our case, some new unprecedented turn.” Natural scientists, as well as social scientists are agreed that any “new unprecedented turn” must be sought in deeper understanding of relations among people and among nations.

The Edwards' Report and the International Relations profession

1988 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 149-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Nicholson
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Social Science ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Research Council ◽  
Social Research ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Social Science Community ◽  
The Social ◽  
Science Community

The Economic and Social Research Council recently published a Report commissioned from a committee chaired by Professor Edwards, a psychiatrist, so that the Council, and the social science community in general, might know what was good and bad in British social sciences, and where the promising future research opportunities lie over the next decade. Boldly called ‘Horizons and Opportunities in the Social Sciences’, the Report condensed the wisdom of social scientists, both British and foreign, and concludes with a broadly but not uncritically favourable picture of the British scene.

Local Institutions at the Crossroads of Environmental Regionalism in Southeast Asia: State-Civil Society Interplays and Tensions

2007 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-54
Author(s):  
Antonio P. Contreras
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Civil Society ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Southeast Asia ◽  
Local Communities ◽  
The State ◽  
Local Institutions ◽  
The Social ◽  
International Interactions ◽  
Civil Societies

This paper inquires into the implications of the different discursive imaginations on civil societies and the state from the perspective of the social sciences, particularly political science and international relations. It focuses on some interfaces and tensions that exist between civil society on one hand, and the state and its bureaucratic instrumentalities on the other, particularly in the domain of environment and natural resources governance in the context of new regionalisms and of alternative concepts of human security. There is now a new context for regionalism in Southeast Asia, not only among state structures, such as the ASEAN and the various Mekong bodies, but also among local civil societies coming from the region. It is in this context that issues confronting local communities are given a new sphere for interaction, as well as a new platform for engaging state structures and processes. This paper illustrates how dynamic are the possibilities for non-state domains for transnational interactions, particularly in the context of the emerging environmental regionalism. This occurs despite the dominance of neo-realist political theorizing, and the state-centric nature of international interactions.

scholarly journals Realism, empiricism and causal inquiry in International Relations: What is at stake?

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 562-587 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam R C Humphreys
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Scientific Realism ◽  
Scientific Practice ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Constructive Empiricism ◽  
Van Fraassen ◽  
Scientific Realist ◽  
Bas Van Fraassen ◽  
Causal Mechanisms ◽  
Everyday World

Discussions of causal inquiry in International Relations are increasingly framed in terms of a contrast between rival philosophical positions, each with a putative methodological corollary — empiricism is associated with a search for patterns of covariation, while scientific realism is associated with a search for causal mechanisms. Scientific realism is, on this basis, claimed to open up avenues of causal inquiry that are unavailable to empiricists. This is misleading. Empiricism appears inferior only if its reformulation by contemporary philosophers of science, such as Bas van Fraassen, is ignored. I therefore develop a fuller account than has previously been provided in International Relations of Van Fraassen’s ‘constructive empiricism’ and how it differs from scientific realism. In light of that, I consider what is at stake in calls for the reconstitution of causal inquiry along scientific realist, rather than empiricist, lines. I argue that scientific realists have failed to make a compelling case that what matters is whether researchers are realists. Constructive empiricism and scientific realism differ only on narrow epistemological and metaphysical grounds that carry no clear implications for the conduct of causal inquiry. Yet, insofar as Van Fraassen has reformed empiricism to meet the scientific realist challenge, this has created a striking disjunction between mainstream practices of causal inquiry in International Relations and the vision of scientific practice that scientific realists and contemporary empiricists share, especially regarding the significance of regularities observed in everyday world politics. Although scientific realist calls for a philosophical revolution in International Relations are overstated, this disjunction demands further consideration.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document