International Relations. A self-Study Guide to Theory
Download 0.79 Mb. Pdf ko'rish
|
International Relations (Theory)
|
New world view
Brockman, John (ed.) 2009: This will change everything: Ideas that will shape the future. New York: Harper Descola, Phillippe 2011: Jenseits von Natur und Kultur. Suhrkamp (in German and French only). Dürr, Hans-Peter 2009: Warum es ums Ganze geht: Neues Denken für eine Welt im Um- bruch. München (in German only). Dürr, Hans-Peter, Popp, Fritz-Albert/Schommers, Wolfram (eds.) 2000: Elemente des Lebens: Naturwissenschaftliche Zugänge. Kusterdingen: Graue Edition (in German only). Hüther/Spannbauer 2012: Connectedness. Warum wir in neues Weltbild brauchen Bern: Verlag Hans Huber (in German only). Hüther, Gerald 2012: Paradigmenwechsel in den Life Sciences, in: Hüther/Spannbauer (eds.): Connectedness. Warum wir in neues Weltbild brauchen Bern: Verlag Hans Hu- ber, 103-124 (in German only). Knapp, Nathalie 2011: Der Quantensprung des Denkens. Reinbek: Rowohlt (in German only). Leggewie/Welzer 2011: Das Ende der Welt wie wir sie kannten. Fischer Verlag (in Ger- man only). Ricard, Matthieu/Thuan, Trinh Xuan 2004: The Quantum and the Lotus: A Journey to the Frontiers where science and and Buddhism meet. New York: Thee Rivers Press. Searle, John 2010: Why Dualism (and Materialism) fail to account for Consciousness, in: Lee, Richard (ed.): Questioning 19 th century assumptions about knowledge: Dualism. New York: State University of New York Press, 5-48. Welzer, Harald 2012: Die Revolution des “Wir”, in: Hüther/Spannbauer (eds.): Connect- edness. Warum wir in neues Weltbild brauchen Bern: Verlag Hans Huber, 61-80 (in German only). Politics/IR and Quantum Theory Akrivoulis, Dimitris 2007: The “Quantum Politics” Metaphor in International Relations: Towards a Hermeneutics of Political Metaphoricity. Paper presented at the 57 th Politi- cal Studies Association Annual Conference, University of Bath, UK, 11-13 April. Becker, Theodore L. (ed.) 1991: Quantum Politics. Applying Quantum Theory to Political Phenomena. New York: Praeger. diZerrega, Gus 1991: Integrating Quantum Theory with Post-Modern Political Thought and Action: The Priority of Relationships over Objects, in: Becker, Theodore L. (ed.) (1991): Quantum Politics. Applying Quantum Theory to Political Phenomena, New York: Praeger, 65-100. Munro, William B. 1927: Physics and Politics: An Old Analogy Revisited, repr. in Becker, Theodore L. (ed.) 1991: Quantum Politics. Applying Quantum Theory to Political Phenomena, New York: Praeger, 3-10. 105 Slaton, Christa D. 1991: Quantum Theory and Political Theory, in: Becker, Theodore L. (ed.) (1991): Quantum Politics. Applying Quantum Theory to Political Phenomena, New York: Praeger, 41-64. Wendt, Alexander 2006: Social Theory as Cartesian Science, in: Guzzini/Leander (eds.): Constructivism and International Relations. Alexander Wendt and his critics. New York: Routledge, 181-239. Wendt, Alexander 2010: Flatland: Quantum Mind and the International Hologram, in: Al- bert, Mathias et al (eds.): New Systems Theories of World Politics, 279-310. Additional references in the text Acharya, A./Buzan, B. (eds.) 2010: Non-Western International Relations Theory. Perspec- tives on and beyond Asia. London: Routledge. Al-Jabri, Mohamed A. 2011: The Formation of Arab reason: Text, Tradition and the con- struction of modernity in the Arab world. London: Tauris. Ellis, George F.R./Maartens, Roy/MacCallum, Malcom 2012: Relativistic Cosmology, Cambridge: Cambridge University. Han, Byung-Chul 2010: Müdigkeitsgesellschaft. Berlin. Matthes & Seitz. Harrison, Edward 2000: Cosmology: The science of the universe. 2 nd ed., Cambridge: Cambridge University. Heisenberg, Werner 1977: The Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Theory, in: Physics and Philosophy, Frankfurt a.M.: Ullstein, 28-40 (Repr. in Heisenberg, Werner 2011: Quantum theory and Philosophy. Stuttgart: Reclam, 42-61). Lefévre, Wolfgang 2001: Introduction, in: Lefévre, Wolfgang (ed.): Between Leibniz, Newton and Kant: Philosophy and Science in the Eighteenth Century. Dordrecht: Kluwer, i-x. Looijen, Rick C. 1999: Holism and Reductionism in Biology and Ecology, Dordrecht: Kluwer. Ma, Xiao-Song/Herbst, Thomas/Zeilinger, Anton et al 2012: Quantum teleportation over 143 km using active feed-forward, in: Nature 489, 269-273. Milburn, Gerard 1997: Quantum technology. London: Allen & Unwin. Tomasello, Michael 2001: The cultural origins of human cognition. Boston: Harvard Uni- versity Press. Tomasello, Michael 2009: Why we cooperate. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Schupp, Franz 2003: Geschichte der Philosophie. Felix Meiner Verlag (in German only). Wilson, Robert A. 2008: Cartesian Psychology and Physical Minds: Individualism and the Science of the Mind. Cambridge: CUP. 106 4. Didactics and method Introduction ......................................................................................................... 107 Criteria for a structured learning process about theories of IR ........................... 108 1. Core question/problem ..................................................................... 108 2. Ontological assumptions about actors and structures in international relations ............................................................... 108 2.1 Assumptions about actors ....................................................................... 109 2.2 Assumptions about structures ................................................................. 111 2.3 Assumptions about the interrelation between agency and structure ...... 112 3. Epistemology and methodology .................................................... 115 3.1 Type of explanation and notion of causality .......................................... 115 3.2 Approach to “levels of analysis” ............................................................ 116 4. General approach to IR as a science and to the practice of international politics ......................................................................... 117 Overview: Criteria for a structured learning process .......................... 118 Review questions ............................................................................................ 119 Consolidation ................................................................................................... 119 107 Introduction As has been discussed in the learning units 1 and 2, theory building is “in- formed” by and embedded in meta-theory: there is theory “behind” the par- ticular theories of IR in that a theory of IR implicitly or explicitly is built on a set of assumptions that are derived from a specific understanding of science. Moreover, the understanding of science is part of a broader scientific world view, a specific historical “order of thought”. Unit 2 was designed in the be- lief that, for a better understanding of the differences between theoretical ap- proaches to IR, you need some basic understanding of general problems of theory building in the social sciences. In Unit 2 you therefore gained knowledge about theory formation as linked to the meta-theoretical level of philosophy of science. You are now familiar with the core elements of any philosophy of science: ontological claims about what is, what exists, what re- ality is made of and what the most general features and relations of the things and entities are; epistemological claims about the kinds of knowledge possi- ble and the criteria for legitimate knowledge; and methodological assump- tions that define how to best come to know and explain. In addition you know about how philosophies of science are embedded into broader world views. Without these world views, it would be difficult to understand where we derive the assumptions and the particular theoretical constructions found at the heart of theories. While even the philosophy of science position that underlies a theory is only rarely spelled out explicitly, this is even truer for the broader (scientific) world view. Both can be understood as a type of “hid- den” theory that shapes our fundamental perception of (social) reality and of what and how we can know about it. Now we will take the next step and link our philosophical discussions to the study of International Relations. Our purpose will be to define a set of questions and criteria for the more qualified study of particular theories of IR. Terms such as ontology, epistemology and methodology have very specific uses and functions within the philosophy of science. For the purpose of our book, they have to be “translated” and applied to International Relations. The aim is to define a range of criteria that can be used for a structured process of learning about particular theoretical approaches to IR. In other words, the fol- lowing chapter presents a set of criteria that will be used later to discuss five Download 0.79 Mb. Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: 
|