Combining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivism
➤ Gửi thông báo lỗi ⚠️ Báo cáo tài liệu vi phạmNội dung chi tiết: Combining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivism
Combining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivism
Combining ‘Incompatible’ Foreign Policy Explanations. How a Realist can borrow from ConstructivismHans MouritzenPre-print versionCitation: Mouritzen, Combining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivism Hans (2016) ‘Combining “incompatible*’ foreign policy explanations. How a realist can borrow from constructivism’, in Journal of international relations and development, 20(3): 631-658.AbstractAccording to perspectivism, models and their explanations can be put ‘next to each other’ and thus set eac Combining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivismh other in perspective, but they can hardly compete or even less be combined. The question whether such combination is allowed is demonstrated to haveCombining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivism
deep epistemological roots. Unfortunately, perspectivism easily leads to the compartmentalisation of research communities and a reduced interest in tCombining ‘Incompatible’ Foreign Policy Explanations. How a Realist can borrow from ConstructivismHans MouritzenPre-print versionCitation: Mouritzen, Combining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivismtually their effects may restrain or reinforce each other in specific explanations. Such combination - in case realism borrowing from constructivism - is illustrated by an explanation to the puzzle, why the German great power is cautious, while smaller Sweden is today hawkish in relation to Russia ( Combining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivismthe Ukraine 2014 conflict). In fact, combination may help bridge the much debated ‘actor-structure’ cleavage in IR.KeywordsExplanatory levels, foreignCombining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivism
policy, geopolitics, lessons of the past, neoclassical realism, perspectivismWhen we explain, we normally base ourselves on one or more explicit theoCombining ‘Incompatible’ Foreign Policy Explanations. How a Realist can borrow from ConstructivismHans MouritzenPre-print versionCitation: Mouritzen, Combining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivisms this: Could and should two theoretical perspectives be combined? Even if we feel that one particular theory is generally better than its competitors, it still often proves to be inadequate for a satisfactory explanation of the particular case at hand. The crucial methodological issue to be address Combining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivismed here is whether a combination of two seemingly ‘incompatible’ theoretical perspectives1 should be possible for explanatory purposes and, if so, howCombining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivism
? If and how explanationshttps://khothuvien.cori!with different roots can be combined is a recurrent theme in the social sciences. In this article it Combining ‘Incompatible’ Foreign Policy Explanations. How a Realist can borrow from ConstructivismHans MouritzenPre-print versionCitation: Mouritzen, Combining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivismlitical and a constructivist type of perspective - for the purpose of explaining the German and Swedish positionings in the face of the Ukrainian conflict of 2014. Why was powerful Germany so cautious, while less powerful Sweden was outright hawkish vis à vis Russia in the conflict diplomacy?Perspec Combining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivismtivism versus Compatibilism: Foreign Policy ExamplesPerspectivism ascribes a value of its own to heterogeneity and the partiality of interpretations tCombining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivism
hat make depictions of the world as we experience it (Lukes 1982; Engelbrekt 2002). Paradigms or perspectives are seen as complementary and mutually eCombining ‘Incompatible’ Foreign Policy Explanations. How a Realist can borrow from ConstructivismHans MouritzenPre-print versionCitation: Mouritzen, Combining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivism of experience and knowledge...What is denied in this claim is the possibility of a “god’s eye view” of the world, which would incorporate every possible perspective and not be perspectival itself’.2Rather than contributing towards full-fledged syntheses, perspectives should be kept apart, both for Combining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivismtheory-building (which is uncontroversial) and - most importantly - for purposes of explanation (theory consumption). Perspectives on one and the ‘samCombining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivism
e’ event can be put next to each other and examined one after the other, but they should not and cannot be integrated.Apart from Singer’s (1961) influCombining ‘Incompatible’ Foreign Policy Explanations. How a Realist can borrow from ConstructivismHans MouritzenPre-print versionCitation: Mouritzen, Combining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_ConstructivismAllison’s Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis? included in the curriculum of several generations of political scientists. The study seeks to explain one and the same foreign policy from three alternative models. The explanatory' object is described in three different ways, thus Combining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivisminviting different explanations for each description (the ‘unitary actor’, the ‘organisational2process’, and (he 'bureaucratic politics’ models of forCombining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivism
eign policy). In other words, the use of different conceptual lenses allegedly leads to different explanations (Allison 1971: 329. note 10).4 Through Combining ‘Incompatible’ Foreign Policy Explanations. How a Realist can borrow from ConstructivismHans MouritzenPre-print versionCitation: Mouritzen, Combining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivism‘new relativism’ in some of the work affiliated with the ‘linguistic turn’ in 1R, most radically in social constructivist and postmodern writings (Lapid 1989; Fierke 2002; Jarvis 2002; Kăpylă and Mikkola 2011; cf. also Engelbrekt 2002). According to this version, postmodern insights should not be su Combining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivismbject to ‘objectivist’ testing belonging to an alien epistemology. Secondly, at a less profound and less explicit level, we often see a de facto perspCombining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivism
ectivism in the sharp, almost disciplinary, distinction between IR and ‘foreign policy analysis’ (FPA) (Hudson 2005)’ and, in broader terms, between aCombining ‘Incompatible’ Foreign Policy Explanations. How a Realist can borrow from ConstructivismHans MouritzenPre-print versionCitation: Mouritzen, Combining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivismll be argued and illustrated in this article, holds that perspectives should - for explanatory purposes - be made compatible by the conscious effort of the analyst.6 ‘Compatible’ means that they should be mutually competitive, possibly offering contradictory real world predictions, but (in some case Combining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivisms) ultimately supplement each other in a specific explanation. Even if forces are contradictory, they may both be at work in a given situation and thuCombining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivism
s ‘push’ actors and developments in opposite directions - the net result being thus a compromise. Therefore the perspectives or theories should be allCombining ‘Incompatible’ Foreign Policy Explanations. How a Realist can borrow from ConstructivismHans MouritzenPre-print versionCitation: Mouritzen, Combining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivismre and domestic policy, respectively. Goldman (1976) has made an analytic contribution (overlooked in the US) to the study of the interaction of foreign and domestic sources of policy and3thus to compatibilism. Whether one sees the foreign sources of foreign policy as causes or conditions of foreign Combining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivism policy or as inputs to the foreign policy process, the common denominator is that foreign and domestic sources of foreign policy are somehow compatibCombining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivism
le. Compatibility is also the tacit assumption made in the work of Putnam (1988). In his ‘two-level game’ regarding trade and economic diplomacy, bothCombining ‘Incompatible’ Foreign Policy Explanations. How a Realist can borrow from ConstructivismHans MouritzenPre-print versionCitation: Mouritzen, Combining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivism.international pressure was a necessary' condition for these policy shifts [in the wake of the Bonn economic summit of 1987]. On the other hand, without domestic resonance, international forces would not have sufficed to produce the accord...’(Putnam 1988: 430). In Goldmann’s terminology, Putnam’s t Combining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivismwo sets of factors are parallel (and probably mutually interactive) causes that can be added to produce the final outcome (being the intersection betwCombining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivism
een ‘acceptable outcomes’ of each of the two sets). The relative strength of the two sets may vary from case to case; no apriori primacy is reserved fCombining ‘Incompatible’ Foreign Policy Explanations. How a Realist can borrow from ConstructivismHans MouritzenPre-print versionCitation: Mouritzen, Combining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivism‘liberal intergovernmentalism’).8 National government leaders form their positions by aggregating the preferences of the most important societal groups, not least domestic producer groups (regarding common foreign policy or issue-areas with unclear economic incentives, governments will have greater Combining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivismleeway, though). As national positions are brought to the European negotiating table, the outcomes not only reflect the different national preferencesCombining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivism
, but also the relative bargaining power of different states (‘asymmetric interdependence’). As in the case of Putnam, governments are also (more or lCombining ‘Incompatible’ Foreign Policy Explanations. How a Realist can borrow from ConstructivismHans MouritzenPre-print versionCitation: Mouritzen, Combining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivismospitable to the adding of domestic factors than systemic liberalism (‘realist environment' and4‘domestic process’ in her terminology). Along this path, we have previously seen Wolfers (1962) add domestic variables, ‘if the house is not burning, but merely overheated’.9 In a small state context. Mou Combining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivismritzen (1988) sees the geopolitical environment as providing the dynamic explanatory skeleton, while domestic factors constitute inertia and may be adCombining_Incompatible_Foreign_Policy_Explanations._How_a_Realist_can_borrow_from_Constructivism
ded, if necessary for explanation. Today, we often see this old compalibilist habit under the label of ‘neoclassical realism’.10 The school’s ambitionGọi ngay
Chat zalo
Facebook