Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-rvbq7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T11:23:14.296Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

About those IR theory day jobs: a response to Chris Brown

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 2011

Abstract

Chris Brown's invitation in ‘IR Theory in Britain – the New Black?’ to consider whether theory's pre-eminence in British IR is warranted appears to have gone unheeded. He asks whether the consuming preoccupation with theory can be justified or will turn out to be as transitory as the ‘new black’ soon to be supplanted by the next ‘new black’. There are many possible explanations for the neglect of Brown's views, but whatever the reason, epistemology can provide some answers. It draws attention to the applied aspect of IR theory as well as the nature of theory's relations with the rest of the discipline, buttressing Brown's arguments to this effect. I go further to ask whether theory's place is not ultimately best seen as one element in an approach not unlike classical redux.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © British International Studies Association 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Brown, Chris, ‘IR Theory in Britain – the New Black?’, Review of International Studies, 32 (2006), pp. 677687.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2 Brown, ‘IR Theory’, p. 685.

3 Ibid., p. 687.

4 Ibid., p. 678.

5 Booth, Ken, ‘Discussion: a Reply to Wallace’, Review of International Studies, 23 (1997), p. 377CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

6 Prager, Carol A. L., ‘Taking Theory for Granted in International Relations’, Political Studies, XXVI (1978), pp. 1529CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

7 Galtung, Johan, ‘The Social Sciences: An Essay on Polarization and Integration’, in Knorr, Klaus and Rosenau, James (eds), Contending Approaches to International Politics (Princeton: Princeton University Press), 1969 p. 251Google Scholar . See also Holden, Gerard, ‘Who Contextualizes the Contextualizers? Disciplinary History and the Discourse about IR Discourse’, Review of International Studies, 28 (2002), pp. 253270CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

8 Cox, Michael, Dunne, Tim and Booth, Ken‘Empires Systems and states: Great Transformations in International Politics’, Review of International Studies, 27 (2001), pp. 115CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

9 Puchala, Donald J., Theory and History in International Relations (New York: Routledge, 2003)Google Scholar .

10 Cited by Cox, Dunne and Booth, ‘Empires, Systems, and States’, p. 1.

11 Anonymous. {http://thinkexist.com} accessed on 9 May 2009.

12 Taleb, Nassim Nicholas, The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable (New York: Random House, 2007)Google Scholar ; and Fukuyama, Francis (ed.), Blindside: How to Anticipate Forcing Events and Wildcards in Global Politics (Washinton, DC: Brookings Institution, 2007)Google Scholar .

13 Tetlock, Philip, Expert Political Judgment: How Good Is It? How Can We Know? (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2005)Google Scholar .

14 Polanyi, Michael, Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-critical Philosophy (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1958), p. 138Google Scholar .

15 Brown, ‘IR Theory’, p. 682.

16 Smith, Steve, ‘Power and truth: A Reply to William Wallace’, Review of International Studies, 23 (1997), p. 508CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

17 Bull, Hedley, ‘International Relations: The Case for a Classical Approach’, in Knorr, Klaus and Rosenau, James N., Contending Approaches to International Politics (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969)Google Scholar .

18 Smith, Steve, ‘The Self-images of a Discipline’, in Booth, Ken and Smith, Steve (eds), International Relations Theory Today (Cambridge: Polity, 1995), p. 315Google Scholar . Cited by Wallace, William, ‘Truth and Power, Monks and Technocrats: Theory and Practice in International Relations’, Review of International Studies, 22 (1996), p. 315CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

19 Shapiro, Ian, The Flight from Reality in the Human Sciences (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2005), p. 212Google Scholar .

20 Wheeler, Nicholas J. and Dunne, Timothy, ‘Hedley Bull's Pluralism of the Intellect and Solidarism of the Will’, International Affairs, 72 (1996), p. 91CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

21 Hoffmann, Stanley, Duties Beyond Borders: On the Limits and Possibilities of Ethical International Politics (Syracuse NY: Syracuse University Press, 1981)Google Scholar .

22 Bull, H.‘Recapturing the Just War for Political Theory’, World Politics, 31 (1979), p. 591CrossRefGoogle Scholar .

23 Nye, Joseph S. Jr., ‘Scholars on the Sidelines’, The Washington Post (13 April 2009), p. A15Google Scholar .

24 Lindblom, Charles and Cohen, David K., Usable Knowledge: Social Science and Social Problem Solving (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1979)Google Scholar .

25 Vinocur, John, ‘One Popular French Voice Who Supports a War’, International Herald Tribune (24 February 2003)Google Scholar .