Mapping international relations theory: Beyond universalism and objectivism.

摘要

In recent years international relations theory has been replete with assessments of its paradigmatic status. There have been a number of theoretical efforts to analyze international relations by reference to alternatives to the dominant realist paradigm. The thesis provides a detailed, comprehensive and thorough account of the present multi-paradigmatic state of international relations theory, via a meta-theoretical mapping of international relations theory, in which existing theories of international relations are symptomatically read and critically assessed.;In its meta-theoretical mapping, the thesis makes the following arguments. First, to advance our understanding of social and global reality it is necessary to break with universalist and objectivist positions, such as positivism, a certain version of structuralism, and Habermasian critical theory. These positions seek totalizing knowledge about social and global reality, which cannot allow for the recognition of the very historicity of international relations theory. Second, to analyze properly the transformation of international relations theory it is necessary to broaden its scope in such a way as to include within it hitherto neglected paradigmatic positions as well as critical discourses of modern society. Third, a meta-theoretical examination of international relations theory, in order to be comprehensive, should involve not only epistemological concerns but also ontological ones, that is, an examination of not only epistemologies but also substantial concepts of international relations theory, such as "the international", historicity, totality, and hegemony. As the thesis argues, multi-paradigmatism at the level of epistemology gave rise to the emergence of an essentially contested characteristic at the level of ontology. The thesis argues that it is these two phenomena that define the recent transformation of international relations theory.;These theories are: the outside-in model, structuralism, the agency problematic, and the Critical Turn. They are located in the discipline of international relations as well as comparative politics, political sociology and social theory. The epistemological positions that form these theories are theoretically analyzed in a detailed fashion. The ontological nature of their conceptual frameworks are subjected to constructive criticism.