Suchergebnisse

In this book Mark Neufeld argues that the predominance of the positivist approach to the study of international politics has meant that theory committed to human emancipation remains poorly developed. He suggests that International Relations theory must move in a non-positivist direction, and takes recent developments in the discipline (including Gramscian, postmodernist, feminist and normative approaches) as evidence that such a shift is already under way. In a comprehensive treatment, he argues that the critical theory of the Frankfurt School can be used to reorient the study of world politics. Drawing on recent work in social and political theory, as well as International Relations, this book offers an accessible analysis of recent developments in the study of international politics

This book argues against the traditional understanding of international relations through the study of ideology and introduces four new major paradigms in the study of international relations theory: Marxian, mass society, community building, and rational choice

With a view to providing contextual background for the Special Issue, this opening article analyses several dimensions of 'The end of International Relations theory?' It opens with a consideration of the status of different types of theory. Thereafter, we look at the proliferation of theories that has taken place since the emergence of the third/fourth debate. The coexistence and competition between an ever-greater number of theories begs the question: what kind of theoretical pluralism should IR scholars embrace? We offer a particular account of theoretical engagement that is preferable to the alternatives currently being practised: integrative pluralism. The article ends on a cautiously optimistic note: given the disciplinary competition that now exists in relation to explaining and understanding global social forces, International Relations may find resilience because it has become theory-led, theory-literate and theory-concerned.

The article seeks to do an audit of the state of International Relations theory (IRT) in India. It examines three facets of IRT in this connection. The first relates to the possibility of a tradition of thinking on issues of universal theoretical significance. The second pertains to an exploration of scholarly reflection on an important principle of Indian foreign policy, namely, non-alignment and the limits of theorizing it. The final facet examines the concerns that inform theorization by Indian scholars since the 1990s. In regard to the first facet, the article argues that there exists an Indian tradition of thinking on issues of order, justice and cosmopolitanism, even though it may not have been expressed in the language of IRT. With regard to non-alignment, the article argues that while it did not result in broader theoretical formulations, it raised a number of first order issues for further theorizing. Finally, it suggests that recent IRT invocations by Indian scholars reflect a more receptive conjuncture for such work, both in terms of India's own changing stature in the world system as well as an acknowledgement of more eclectic methods and possibilities in the broader world of the social sciences.