International Relations. A self-Study Guide to Theory

Approach to “levels of 
analysis” 
 
•
Micro-level structures: Actors and their interactions 
(domain of causal theory)
•
Macro-level structures/”external” social structures 
(domain of constitutive theory) 
•
But: Ontological and epistemological interdepend-
ence (see “nature of explanation” and “agency and 
structure”) 
Philosophy of science 
•
Scientific realist ontology (unobservables are real and 
legitimate objects of scientific inquiry; material-
ism/physicalism) 
•
Social constructivist ontology (idealism) 
•
Positivist epistemology (for causal, historical analysis 
at the micro-level of actors and interactions) 
Normative perspective 
• Social constructivist perspective is “critical science”. 
• Transformative potentials in social structures due to 
the ideational quality of collectively shared ideas.
• Reality is a social construction. Ideas make a differ-
ence: Opens up political possibilities (transformation 
and change). 
• Tendencies/possibilities inherent in structure to be 
actualized by agents in a concrete way. 

---

222 
 
Social constructivist theory
Theory and practice/role of 
the scientist
• For the scientist and policy-maker, social reality is an 
object of scientific inquiry, an objective social fact. 
• Social scientific theories can become part of their 
world only in “moments of reflexivity” 
Review questions 
1. What are the core assumptions of “constructivist” ontology?
2. Explain the ontological position of a “mutual constitution” of agency and 
structure. 
3. Outline the constitutive in contrast to the causal model for explaining in-
ternational politics. 
Step 6: 
Final self-study and consolidation 
In his more recent writings (Wendt 2006, Wendt 2010) Wendt formulates 
critical positions and presents a fundamental revision of the ontology of his 
Social Theory (1999). In light of the findings and philosophical interpreta-
tions of quantum physics, he revises his ontology in favor of a new position 
of non-duality of subject and object and a naturalism based not on classical 
physics (Cartesian Science) but on quantum physics. In so doing, Alexander 
Wendt intends to bring the discipline back to the very basic questions of phi-
losophy of science: Is there a reality “out there” and what are the ontological 
features? Is reality material or ideational? Is reality independent of our mind? 
As has been introduced in Unit 3, many disciplines, including the natural sci-
ences, philosophy, neurosciences, neurophilosophy, biophilosophy, philoso-
phy of mind and sociobiology, are currently heavily debating these very gen-
eral questions of mind/matter, ideas/material world. There is a rising aware-
ness of the findings of quantum physics and their interpretations. It has been 
argued in Unit 3 that the debates about how to interpret these findings for the 
“macro-world” might set the parameters of meta-theoretical discourses in the 
years to come. Additionally, they might fundamentally call into question dual 
thinking in scientific inquiry and contribute to a major shift in the fundamen-
tal understanding of science in all disciplines. While this has been happening 
increasingly over the past decade, Wendt probably was and is the first to de-

---

223 
pict IR theory in light of the findings of quantum physics in recent years 
(2006, 2010).