Suchergebnisse

This article provides both a critical review of Alex Wendt's Social Theory of International Politics & its version of "constructivism," & a more principled assessment of "progress" in theory building in the social sciences. As to the first task, I argue that Wendt's attempt, that is both indebted to scientific realism & constructivism, fails because of the incompatibility of these two metatheoretical positions. Consequently, his effort of constructing a new "middle ground" is a disciplinary undertaking that is more likely to result in a new orthodoxy than in the creation of new interesting puzzles by engaging constructivism's heuristic power. In addressing the second question, I follow the epistemological discussion of the last few decades & attempt to show their dependence on the often uncritical acceptance of certain metaphors of "growth," "approximation," "foundations" that deserve closer critical examination, before we can embrace a particular metatheory & utilize its criteria in the assessment of knowledge claims. 1 Figure. Adapted from the source document.

The fundamental change occasioned byperestroika, the dissolution of the Soviet Bloc, the reunification of Germany, and the end of the 'Cold War' has become a crucial test for the explanation of change provided by the established paradigm of international politics, neo-realism. In at least three respects, this approach was embarrassed by the chain of events.