The end of International Relations theory?

European Journal of International Relations

Volumn 19, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 405-425

  Dunne, Tim ^a   Hansen, Lene ^b   Wight, Colin ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

^c UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

great debates; International Relations theory; meta theory; paradigms; pluralism

Indexed keywords

EID: 84883641871     PISSN: 13540661     EISSN: 14603713     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1354066113495485     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. Adler E,Pouliot VInternational Practices. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2011:.
2. Baldwin DANeorealism and Neoliberalism: The Contemporary Debate. New York: Columbia University Press; 1993:.
3. Bhaskar RA Realist Theory of Science. Leeds: Leeds Books; 1975:.
4. Bhaskar RThe Possibility of Naturalism: A Philosophical Critique of Contemporary Human Sciences. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf; 1989:.
5. Brown CInternational Relations Theory: New Normative Approaches. New York: Columbia University Press; 1992:.
6. Brown C.The poverty of grand theory.European Journal of International Relations. 2013;19 (3): 483-497.
7. Bull HThe Aberystwyth Papers: International Politics, 1919-1969. Porter B, ed. London: Oxford University Press; 1972:.
8. Buzan B,Little R.Why International Relations has failed as an intellectual project and what to do about it.Millennium: Journal of International Studies. 2001;30:19-39.
9. Critical approaches to security in Europe: A networked manifesto.Security Dialogue. 2006;37:443-487.
10. Der Derian J.Imaging terror: Logos, pathos and ethos.Third World Quarterly. 2005;26:23-37.
11. Dougherty JE,Pfaltzgraff RLContending Theories of International Relations: A Comprehensive Survey. New York: Longman; 1997:.
12. International Relations Theories: Discipline and Diversity. Dunne TKurki MSmith S, ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2013:.
13. Global Politics: A New Introduction. Edkins JZehfuss M, ed. New York: Routledge; 2009:.
14. Feyerabend PAgainst Method. London and New York: Verso; 1988:.
15. Fierke KM.Multiple identities, interfacing games: The social construction of Western action in Bosnia.European Journal of International Relations. 1996;2:467-497.
16. Fierke KMPolitical Self-sacrifice: Agency, Body and Emotion in International Relations. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press; 2013:.
17. Frieden JA,Lake DA.International Relations as a social science: Rigor and relevance.Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. 2005;600:136-156.
18. Geuss RThe Idea of a Critical Theory: Habermas and the Frankfurt School. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1981:.
19. Giddens AThe Constitution of Society: Introduction of the Theory of Structuration. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press; 1984:.
20. Godfrey-Smith PTheory and Reality: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press; 2003:.
21. Guzzini S.The ends of International Relations theory: Stages of reflexivity and modes of theorizing.European Journal of International Relations. 2013;19 (3): 521-541.
22. Hagmann J,Biersteker TJ.Beyond the published discipline: Toward a critical pedagogy of international studies.European Journal of International Relations. 2012;:.
23. Holsti K.Scholarship in an era of anxiety: The study of international politics during the Cold War.Review of International Studies. 1998;24:17-46.
24. Hudson VM,Caprioli M,Ballif-Spanvill B, et al.The heart of the matter: The security of women and the security of states.International Security. 2009;33:7-45.
25. JacksonPT (2010) What is theory? Available at: http://www.isacompendium.com/subscriber/tocnode?d=g9781444336597_chunk_g978144433659721_ss1-5.
26. Jackson PT,Nexon DA.International theory in a post-paradigmatic era: From substantive wagers to scientific ontologies.European Journal of International Relations. 2013;19 (3): 543-565.
27. Keohane ROInternational Institutions and State Power: Essays in International Relations Theory. Boulder, CO and London: Westview Press; 1989:.
28. King G,Keohane RO,Verba SDesigning Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 1994:.
29. Kratochwil F.The monologue of 'science'.International Studies Review. 2003;5:124-128.
30. Lake DA.Why 'isms' are evil: Theory, epistemology, and academic sects as impediments to understanding and progress.International Studies Quarterly. 2011;55:465-480.
31. Lake D.Theory is dead, long live theory: The end of the great debates and the rise of eclecticism in International Relations.European Journal of International Relations. 2013;19 (3): 567-587.
32. Lapid Y.The third debate: On the prospects of international theory in a post-positivist era.International Studies Quarterly. 1989;33:235-254.
33. Lapid Y.Through dialogue to engaged pluralism: The unfinished business of the third debate.International Studies Review. 2003;5:128-131.
34. Lebow RNRealism Reconsidered: The Legacy of Hans Morgenthau in International Relations. Williams MC, ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2007:241-268.
35. McDermott R,Wernimont N,Koopman C.Applying psychology to international studies: Challenges and opportunities in examining traumatic stress.International Studies Perspectives. 2011;12:119-135.
36. Marsh D,Furlong ETheory and Methods in Political Science. 2002) Ontology and epistemology in political science. In: MarshDStokerG (eds) Theory and Methods in Political Science, 2nd edn.Basingstoke: Palgrave, 17-41.Marsh DStoker G, ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave; 2002:17-41.
37. Mearsheimer J,Walt S.Leaving theory behind: Why simplistic hypothesis testing is bad for International Relations.European Journal of International Relations. 2013;19 (3): 427-457.
38. Merton RKOn Theoretical Sociology: Five Essays, Old and New. New York: Free Press; 1967:.
39. Morgenthau HJPolitics among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace. New York: Knopf; 1978:.
40. Onuf NGWorld of our Making: Rules and Rule in Social Theory and International Relations. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press; 1989:.
41. Popper KThe Logic of Scientific Discovery. New York: Harper Torchbook; 1959:.
42. Reus-Smit C.International Relations, irrelevant? Don't blame theory.Millennium: Journal of International Studies. 2012;40:525-540.
43. Reus-Smit C.Beyond metatheory?.European Journal of International Relations. 2013;19 (3): 589-608.
44. Rosenau JNRosenau JNThe Scientific Study of Foreign Policy. London: Frances Pinter; 1980:19-31.
45. Schelling TCThe Strategy of Conflict. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1960:.
46. Schmidt BCThe Political Discourse of Anarchy: A Disciplinary History of International Relations. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press; 1998:.
47. Sil R,Katzenstein PJBeyond Paradigms: Analytic Eclecticism in the Study of World Politics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan; 2010:.
48. Smith S.Dialogue and reinforcement of orthodoxy in International Relations.International Studies Review. 2003;5:141-153.
49. Smith S.Singing our world into existence: International Relations theory and September 11.International Studies Quarterly. 2004;48:499-515.
50. Smith S,Owens PThe Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations. 2008) Alternative approaches to international theory. In: BaylisJSmithSOwensP (eds) The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations, 4th edn.Oxford: Oxford University Press, 174-191.Baylis JSmith SOwens P, ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2008:174-191.
51. Sylvester C.Anatomy of a footnote.Security Dialogue. 2007;38:547-558.
52. Sylvester C.Experiencing the end and afterlives of International Relations/theory.European Journal of International Relations. 2013;19 (3): 609-626.
53. Vasquez JA.Toward a unified strategy for peace education: Resolving the two cultures problem in the classroom.Journal of Conflict Resolution. 1976;20:707-728.
54. Viotti PR,Kauppi MVInternational Relations Theory: Realism, Pluralism, Globalism, and Beyond. New York: Macmillan; 1987:.
55. Viotti PR,Kauppi MVInternational Relations Theory: Realism, Pluralism, Globalism, and Beyond. 2012) International Relations Theory: Realism, Pluralism, Globalism, and Beyond, 5th edn.Boston, MA: Longman.Boston, MA: Longman; 2012:.
56. Wæver OOn Security. Lipschutz RD, ed. New York: Colombia University Press; 1995:46-86.
57. Wæver OPositivism and Beyond. Smith SBooth KZalewski M, ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1996:149-185.
58. Wæver OInternational Relations Theories: Discipline and Diversity. Dunne TKurki MSmith S, ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2007:288-308.
59. Walker RBJInside/Outside: International Relations as Political Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1993:.
60. Walt SM.International Relations: One world, many theories.Foreign Policy. 1998;110:29-46.
61. Walt SM.The relationship between theory and policy in International Relations.Annual Review of Political Science. 2005;8:23-48.
62. Waltz KNTheory of International Politics. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley; 1979:.
63. Waltz KN.More may be better.Adelphi Papers. 1981;:171.
64. Wendt ASocial Theory of International Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1999:.
65. Wiggershaus RThe Frankfurt School: Its History, Theories and Political Significance. Cambridge: Polity; 1994:.
66. Williams MC.Words, images, enemies: Securitization and international politics.International Studies Quarterly. 2003;47:511-531.
67. Zak PJ,Kugler J.Neuroeconomics and international studies: A new understanding of trust.International Studies Perspectives. 2011;12:136-152.
68. Zalewski MInternational Theory: Positivism and Beyond. Booth KSmith SZalewski M, ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1996:340-353.