The critical social theory of the Frankfurt School, and the 'social turn' in IR

Review of International Studies

Volumn 31, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 195-209

  Weber, Martin ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 12944268801     PISSN: 02602105     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0260210505006388     Document Type: Review

References (55)

1. Chris Brown, ' "Our Side"? Critical Theory and International Relations', in Richard Wyn Jones (ed.), Critical Theory and World Politics (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 2001).
2. See, for instance, Chris Brown, International Relations Theory - New Normative Approaches (London: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1992); Mark Neufeld, The Restructuring of International Relations Theory (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996); Andrew Linklater, The Transformation of Political Community (Cambridge: Polity, 1998).
3. See, for instance, Chris Brown, International Relations Theory - New Normative Approaches (London: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1992); Mark Neufeld, The Restructuring of International Relations Theory (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996); Andrew Linklater, The Transformation of Political Community (Cambridge: Polity, 1998).
4. See, for instance, Chris Brown, International Relations Theory - New Normative Approaches (London: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1992); Mark Neufeld, The Restructuring of International Relations Theory (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996); Andrew Linklater, The Transformation of Political Community (Cambridge: Polity, 1998).
5. See Juergen Haacke in this Forum. See also Martin Weber 'Engaging Globalization: Critical Theory and Global Political Change', Alternatives, 27 (2002), pp. 301-25.
6. Alexander Wendt, 'What is International Relations for? Notes Toward a Postcritical View', in Wyn Jones (ed.), Critical Theory and World Politics.
7. Theodor W. Adorno, Negative Dialectic (London: Routledge, 1973).
8. The positivism-dispute signals a preparatory stage here. Theodor W. Adorno (ed.), The Positivism Dispute in German Sociology (London: Heinemann, 1969).
9. See, for instance, Axel Honneth, The Struggle for Recognition (New York: SUNY, 1996).
10. Juergen Habermas, Erkenntnis und Interesse (Knowledge and Human Interest) (Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 1999), pp. 84-7.
11. Ole Weaver, 'What Was the Inter-Paradigm Debate?' S. Smith, K. Booth and M. Zalewski (eds.), International Theory: Positivism and Beyond (London: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1996).
12. Habermas, Erkenntnis, p. 376.
13. Ibid., p. 300.
14. I use the term 'dyadic-interactionist'(and variations) to mark off conceptions such as 'clash or convergence of interests' between two subjects - where both, subjects and their interests are given, as in most liberal theory - from 'proper' inter-subjectivist theory.
15. Described in the exploration of particularly the aporias of Adorno's thought by Honneth, 'Critical theory from Adorno to Habermas'; Axel Honneth, The Fragmented World of the Social - Essays in Social and Political Philosophy (New York: SUNY Press, 1990).
16. Described in the exploration of particularly the aporias of Adorno's thought by Honneth, 'Critical theory from Adorno to Habermas'; Axel Honneth, The Fragmented World of the Social - Essays in Social and Political Philosophy (New York: SUNY Press, 1990).
17. See Honneth, The Fragmented World, pp. 115-20.
18. Habermas, Erkenntnis.
19. At least in the context of the writings in and around The Theory of Communicative Action (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1997). Meanwhile, of course, his work has taken what some commentators have referred to as a 'liberal turn', though this is perhaps understood better as a more comprehensive turn away from 'crisis theoretic' premises in his social theory towards a more focused interest in tensions between legality, legitimisation and legitimacy in 'post-national' liberal societies.
20. Habermas, Theory of Communication Action, pp. 153-97.
21. See, for example, Talcott Parsons, The System of Modern Societies (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1971).
22. See on this the extensive discussion of Parsons' theoretical development in Habermas, Theory of Communication Action, pp. 199-299. Habermas shows that Parsons' account of systems-integration remains open to concerns of the lifeworld-perspective, but assimilates the latter according to the former by projecting the logic of the process of systems-differentiation onto the differentiation of the lifeworld (p. 287).
23. Habermas, Theory of Communicative Action, p. 287.
24. Mathias Albert, 'Observing World Politics: Luhmann's Systems Theory of Society and International Relations' Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 28 (1999), pp. 239-65.
25. M. Albert, 'Governance and Democracy in European Systems: On Systems Theory and European integration', Review of International Studies, 28: 2 (2002), pp. 293-309.
26. Niklas Luhmann, Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft, 2 vols (Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 1997) is the most comprehensive, condensed statement of Luhmann's programme. A good overview of modern systems theory as he advances it can be found in N. Luhmann, Social Systems (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1995).
27. Niklas Luhmann, Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft, 2 vols (Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 1997) is the most comprehensive, condensed statement of Luhmann's programme. A good overview of modern systems theory as he advances it can be found in N. Luhmann, Social Systems (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1995).
28. Luhmann, Die Gesellschaft (vol. II); on pp. 806-12, Luhmann considers globalisation and regionalisation from the perspective of the functionally differentiated world society; on his reading, unequal and non-synchronous conditioning of systems-operation reflects tendencies towards either inhibiting or advancing functional differentiation, accounting for the persistence of, and tensions around 'geographical' and territorially conceived variations. However, according to Luhmann, these occur already within and against the background of functionally differentiated world society.
29. Albert, 'Governance and Democracy', p. 299.
30. John Mingers, 'Can Social System be Autopoetic ? Assessing Luhmann's social theory', The Sociological Review (2002), p. 289.
31. See Dietrich Jung, The Political Sociology of World Society', European Journal of International Relations, 7: 4 (2003) pp. 443-74, at 446.
32. Honneth, The Fragmented World, p. 89.
33. Karl-Otto Apel, 'Die Vernunftfunktion der kommunikativen Rationalitaet', K. O. Apel and M. Kettner (eds.), Die Eine Vernunft und die vielen Rationalitaeten (Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 1996).
34. Niklas Luhmann, Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft.
35. Axel Honneth and Hans Joas, Social Action and Human Nature (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), pp. 252-3.
36. On the concepts, analysis, and plausibility of autopoetic neo-funtional systems theory more generally, see Mingers, 'Can Social Systems be Autopoetic?'. On the specific point, p. 291.
37. Habermas, Theory of Communicative Action; p. 155. Habermas gives a robust account of the loss to social theory which arises from system-theory's foreclosure of the critical interest in social pathologies from the perspective of action-orientation on p. 377.
38. Habermas, Theory of Communicative Action, p. 182.
39. Honneth, The Fragmented World, p. 101.
40. Thomas Risse, '"Let's Argue": Communicative Action in World Politics', International Organization, 54: 1 (2000), pp. 1-39.
41. Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics (Cambridge; Cambridge University Press, 1999). His embrace of modern systems theory is manifest in his 'What is International Relations For ? Notes Towards a Post-Critical View', in Wyn Jones, Critical Theory, pp. 203-5. While Wendt's position clearly cannot be identified with the range of constructivist outlooks in IR theory (see International Studies Review Forum), his role in reframing the reflectivist-rationalist controversy makes his work central to concerns over 'new orthodoxies' in IR theory (see Friedrich Kratochvil, 'Constructing a New Orthodoxy? Wendt's "Social Theory of International Politics" and the Constructivist Challenge', Millennium, 29: 1, pp. 73-101).
42. Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics (Cambridge; Cambridge University Press, 1999). His embrace of modern systems theory is manifest in his 'What is International Relations For ? Notes Towards a Post-Critical View', in Wyn Jones, Critical Theory, pp. 203-5. While Wendt's position clearly cannot be identified with the range of constructivist outlooks in IR theory (see International Studies Review Forum), his role in reframing the reflectivist-rationalist controversy makes his work central to concerns over 'new orthodoxies' in IR theory (see Friedrich Kratochvil, 'Constructing a New Orthodoxy? Wendt's "Social Theory of International Politics" and the Constructivist Challenge', Millennium, 29: 1, pp. 73-101).
43. Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics (Cambridge; Cambridge University Press, 1999). His embrace of modern systems theory is manifest in his 'What is International Relations For ? Notes Towards a Post-Critical View', in Wyn Jones, Critical Theory, pp. 203-5. While Wendt's position clearly cannot be identified with the range of constructivist outlooks in IR theory (see International Studies Review Forum), his role in reframing the reflectivist-rationalist controversy makes his work central to concerns over 'new orthodoxies' in IR theory (see Friedrich Kratochvil, 'Constructing a New Orthodoxy? Wendt's "Social Theory of International Politics" and the Constructivist Challenge', Millennium, 29: 1, pp. 73-101).
44. Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics (Cambridge; Cambridge University Press, 1999). His embrace of modern systems theory is manifest in his 'What is International Relations For ? Notes Towards a Post-Critical View', in Wyn Jones, Critical Theory, pp. 203-5. While Wendt's position clearly cannot be identified with the range of constructivist outlooks in IR theory (see International Studies Review Forum), his role in reframing the reflectivist-rationalist controversy makes his work central to concerns over 'new orthodoxies' in IR theory (see Friedrich Kratochvil, 'Constructing a New Orthodoxy? Wendt's "Social Theory of International Politics" and the Constructivist Challenge', Millennium, 29: 1, pp. 73-101).
45. Chris Brown considered Luhmannian systems-theoretic accounts of world society with the resources provided by the English School in 'World Society and the English School: An International Society Perspective on World Society' European Journal of International Relations, 7: 4 (2001), pp. 436-7. Albert, 'Observing World Polities' and 'Governance and Democracy'.
46. Chris Brown considered Luhmannian systems-theoretic accounts of world society with the resources provided by the English School in 'World Society and the English School: An International Society Perspective on World Society' European Journal of International Relations, 7: 4 (2001), pp. 436-7. Albert, 'Observing World Polities' and 'Governance and Democracy'.
47. Mingers, 'Can Social Systems be Autopoetic?'.
48. Albert, 'Observing World Polities'; the approach together with Habermas' systems-lifeworld distinction in Dietrich Jung, The Political Sociology of World Society', pp. 443-74.
49. Such a diagnosis links up with the critique of Giddens' structuration theory by Justin Rosenberg, The Follies of Globalisation Theory (London: Verso, 2000), pp. 185-7. Drawing on Alan Sica, Rosenberg traces the concealed commitment to Parsonian functionalism in Giddens' thought. Insofar as Giddens has been a source of constant inspiration to Wendt's constructivist project, the latter's interest in systems theory seems cogent. From a different angle, Mingers ('Can Social Systems be Autopoetic?') confirms the cogency of structurationist and autopoetic systems-functionalist research concerns. Wendt's idiosyncrasy lies in conceptualising steering media as media at the disposal of actors (in his case states), utilisable for conscious deployment in directing complex social integration towards desired goals. Of course, this is anathema to Luhmann's conception of the steering functions of intersystemically available media.
50. Bernstein, Recovering Ethical Life (London: Routledge, 1995). S. Ashenden and D. Owen, Foucault contra Hahermas (London: SAGE. 1999).
51. Bernstein, Recovering Ethical Life (London: Routledge, 1995). S. Ashenden and D. Owen, Foucault contra Hahermas (London: SAGE. 1999).
52. See, on this point, Graeme Kirkpatrick, 'Evolution or Progress ? A (Critical) Defence of Habermas' Theory of Social Development', Thesis Eleven, 72:3 (2003), pp. 108-9.
53. See, for instance, Thomas MacCarthy, 'Complexity and Democracy: Or The Seducements of Systems Theory', in Axel Honneth and Hans Joas, Communicative Action (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1991), pp. 119-39.
54. Linklater, The Transformation of Political Community (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1998), pp. 181-3.
55. Habermas, 'A Reply', in Honneth and Joas, Communicative Action (Cambridge: Polity, 1991), p. 261.