Suchergebnisse

Realism and constructivism are often viewed as competing paradigms for understanding international relations, though scholars are increasingly arguing that the two are compatible. Edited by one of the leading proponents of realist constructivism, this volume shows what realist constructivism looks like in practice by innovatively combining exposition and critiques of the realist constructivist approach with a series of international case studies. Each chapter addresses a key empirical question in international relations and provides important guidance for how to combine both approaches effectively in research. Addressing future directions and possibilities for realist constructivism in international relations, this book makes a significant contribution to the theorizing of global politics.

The newly revised and updated edition of International Organization is an introduction to the study of international organizations in the field of International Relations intended for students in the discipline. It looks at the different ways in which IOs are studied and then applies these different modes to a variety of specific case studies

"Realism and constructivism, two key contemporary theoretical approaches to the study of international relations, are commonly taught as mutually exclusive ways of understanding the subject. Realist Constructivism explores the common ground between the two, and demonstrates that, rather than being in simple opposition, they have areas of both tension and overlap. There is indeed space to engage in a realist constructivism. But at the same time, there are important distinctions between them, and there remains a need for a constructivism that is not realist, and a realism that is not constructivist. Samuel Barkin argues more broadly for a different way of thinking about theories of international relations, that focuses on the corresponding elements within various approaches rather than on a small set of mutually exclusive paradigms. Realist Constructivism provides an interesting new way for scholars and students to think about international relations theory"--Provided by publisher

I argue two things here, in response to Andrew Bennett's 'Found in Translation: Combining Discourse Analysis with Computer Assisted Content Analysis'. The first is that to speak of a single method within any given research project is misleading. All research projects are necessarily multi-method, so our conversation should be about how to mix, not whether to do so. The second is that, while methods are necessarily mixed within research projects, mixing methodologies is a much more fraught exercise, inasmuch as methodology implies an epistemology, a philosophy of science, in a way that method does not.