What’s the point of being a discipline? Four disciplinary strategies and the future of International Relations

Corry, Olaf

doi:10.1177/00108367221098492

Cited by 21 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 92 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…IR's 'paradigm peace' suggests that the field is now rich in theoretical pluralism, but seemingly poor in inter-theoretical dialogue. Fragmentation has increased -between realists, feminists, liberals, Marxists, and so forth -as have concerns over the prospects of relativism (Berenskoetter, 2018;Corry, 2022;Dunne et al, 2013;Jackson, 2015Jackson, , 2016Jackson, , 2019Jackson and Nexon, 2013;Karkour and Giese, 2020;Lake, 2011Lake, , 2013Michelsen and Tallis, 2018;Rengger, 2000;Schiller, 2020;Sylvester, 2007;Waever, 1996;Wallace, 1996;Wight, 1996Wight, , 2018Wight, , 2019. Although it is certainly questionable whether IR is more partitioned now than it has been before (Kristensen, 2016), the overarching concern persists: does pluralism in conjunction with fragmentation compromise the attainment of truth?…”

Section: Fragmentation Relativism and Truthmentioning

confidence: 99%

The question of truth: how facts, space and time shape conversations in IR

Fazendeiro

2023

European Journal of International Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Truth is as regularly invoked in International Relations (IR) as it is contested. Due to increased plurality, truth is no longer taken for granted, with some suggesting that relativism is on its way. At the same time, despite uncertainty as to the meaning of truth, research and factual verification persists, as findings remain hotly debated in IR, sometimes leading to entrenched, almost irreconcilable debates among scholars. This essay suggests that one way in which to bridge truth claims in the face of potential, albeit unwarranted, relativism is to distinguish between meaningful and factual truth. Factual truth is about assessing whether (raw) data qualifies as data at all, while meaningful truth – upon which most debates in IR are based – grounds our interpretation; it reveals reality’s various facets according to specific spatial and temporal concepts. Viewing conversations in IR as concerned with meaningful as opposed to factual truth allows scholars to lay relativism to rest. The essay also claims that conversations that confuse meaningfulness for factual verification – as in the debates between liberal institutionalists and structural realists in the 1990s – lead to scholarly entrenchment with no resolution in sight. Distinct temporal and spatial assumptions are often incompatible. As a result, such meaningful conversations are less about factual verifiability than about containing reification and enlarging the perspectives with which to exercise political judgement.

show abstract

Section: Fragmentation Relativism and Truthmentioning

confidence: 99%

The question of truth: how facts, space and time shape conversations in IR

Fazendeiro

2023

European Journal of International Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Doubting that such disputes promote scientific progress in the first place, more vigorous complaints were that "we organize ourselves into academic 'sects' that engage in self-affirming research and then wage theological debates between academic religions" (Lake 2011, p. 465). The question was raised whether the IR discipline should be dissolved altogether in favour of new, subject-specific divisions, such as "conflict" and "political economy" (Reiter 2015; see also Dunne et al 2013 andCorry 2022).…”

Section: Researching the Alliancementioning

confidence: 99%

Introduction: NATO as an object of research

Mayer¹

2023

Research Handbook on NATO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contrary to the realist's expectations about the demise of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) after the end of the Cold War, the institution has been playing a key role in transatlantic security and prosperity for more than seven decades. It has proven highly flexible and has expanded both its functional and geographic remits. After Russia's Ukraine invasion of February 2022 and its continuing undermining of the rule-based Euro-Atlantic order, NATO is far from obsolete currently. Notably containing Russia will remain one of its most critical tasks for the foreseeable future.When the North Atlantic Treaty (NAT) was signed on 4 April 1949 in Washington, the contracting parties did not clearly envision the creation of an organization with advanced institutional commitments. They discussed this merely as a possibility. Nowhere does the NAT refer to "organization", let alone a "North Atlantic Treaty Organization". Nonetheless, over time the institution developed organizational features. Several permanent bodies were established, such as the North Atlantic Council (NAC), the Alliance's prime decision-making body. The Allies consolidated their armed forces on a centralized basis and an integrated military command started regulating member state behaviour to achieve joint security objectives. To provide for political control and guidance over military matters, a civil service was instituted. A plethora of organizational units, ad hoc working groups, commands, headquarters and supporting agencies were formed whereby NATO acquired significant expertise and competencies. Allowing it to interact with the external environment, NATO's civilian and military staff enjoy a number of powers that encourage, shape and help implement joint agreements among the Allies. This remarkable reinforcement has led some scholars to portray NATO as "the most robust and deeply institutionalized alliance in the modern world" (Saideman and Auerswald 2012, p. 67).NATO's membership has risen steadily beyond the twelve founding parties of the NAT, inter alia by Greece and Turkey (1952) and West Germany (1955). Based on Article 10 of the NAT, "any other European State in a position to further the principles of this Treaty and to contribute to the security of the North Atlantic area" can be invited to join the organization. This is also referred to as NATO's "open door policy". After 1990, its membership was particularly sought-after. Many former Warsaw Pact members were admitted (Asmus 2002), all of which were previously part of NATO's cooperation structures such as the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council (EAPC) and the Partnership for Peace (PfP). After Russia started waging war against Ukraine in 2022, traditional neutral states Finland and Sweden likewise wished to join. At the June 2022 NATO Summit in Madrid, Heads of State and Government stated in their declaration to invite these countries "to become members". Pending successful ratification from all the current 30 NATO nations, the membership will rise to 32. At the same time, no singl...

show abstract

Security in Crisis

Peoples

2024

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The concept of crisis is a recurrent staple in representations of modern forms of insecurity—from nuclear proliferation to cyber-security, armed conflict, the instability of political institutions, from pandemics to risks of social and financial collapse. Amidst this seeming ubiquity and ever-presence, the onset of climate and ecological emergencies as potential planetary-scale threats to the habitability of the Earth raise particularly urgent questions for how we conceive of and deal with crisis insecurity. How these forms of planetary insecurity come to be known, understood, and managed is thus of pressing importance. This book consequently seeks to provide an analysis of the complex combinations of political and technological understandings entailed in what it terms as ‘planetary crisis management’. Arguing that the emergence, scope, and scale of planetary insecurity and crisis management challenge traditional disciplinary boundaries of the study of International Relations and security, the book adopts an interdisciplinary outlook that integrates ideas and approaches from across political theory and anthropology (on conceptions of crisis); climate science and the wider study of environment and ecology in the ‘Anthropocene’ (on planetary insecurities and ideas of geoengineering); Science and Technology Studies (on the ‘technopolitics’ of crisis management and the ‘sociotechnical imagination’ of planetary futures); and critical security studies (on critical approaches to the international and to security). In the process, the book considers how technopolitical ‘fixes’ for planetary crisis and emergency are often bound up with vexed questions of who ‘we’ are, and what it means to imagine and secure a planetary future.

show abstract

What’s the point of being a discipline? Four disciplinary strategies and the future of International Relations

Cited by 21 publications

References 92 publications

The question of truth: how facts, space and time shape conversations in IR

The question of truth: how facts, space and time shape conversations in IR

Introduction: NATO as an object of research

Security in Crisis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About