90 likes | 110 Views
Exploring social construction in international politics, critiquing traditional IR theory assumptions, and analyzing the impact of social dimensions on change and outcomes. This approach emphasizes the significance of social constructs such as values, norms, and assumptions, in different contexts. Key topics include ontology, epistemology, agency, and the debate between conventional and critical constructivism. Language as the unit of analysis is crucial, along with hypothesis testing and understanding constructivist causation. Examining the role of human interaction and contextual factors in shaping the international landscape.
E N D
Constructivism:The Social Construction of International Politics POL 3080 Approaches to IR
Introduction • Critique of static material assumptions of traditional IR theory; • Emphasis on the social dimensions of international relations and the possibility of change; • Differs from the traditional approaches (realism and liberalism) in terms of ontology and epistemology (not in terms of variables) • Different research program
International Politics as Social Construction • Construction -- an act that brings into being a subject or object that otherwise would not exist; • Once an object is constructed, it has a particular meaning and use within a given context; • Social phenomena take place in a specific historical, cultural and political context. They are a product of human interaction in a social world • The social constructs are in the form of social values, norms and assumptions.
Assumptions and Research Focus • Social construction assumes differences across context rather than a single objective reality (i.e. trying to explain the variation across different realities); • Main critique about realism and liberal approaches – they tend to explain the conditions of persistence; • Social dimension matters. The focus of the research is on the norms, rules and language; • IR is a “world of our making,” i.e. agents matter. The emphasis is on the process of interaction, where the individuals not only react but also interact in a meaningful way.
Ontological and Methodological Foundations I • Ontology (what do we know) - whether there is a real world out there that is independent of our knowledge of it. • Social ontology -- shared understanding and acceptance of the context. • Epistemology (how do we know it) -- whether we can discover the world through direct observation or not. • Rationalists accept the logic of consequences – the rational acts produce outcomes that maximize the interests of the individual units. • Constructivists accept the logic of appropriateness – rationality is a function of legitimacy defined by shared values and norms within various social structures. • Therefore, social context produces different outcomes for individuals (not only their individual interest matters).
Ontological and Methodological Foundations II • The primary concern for constructivists is to bring the social back into the discipline. • Constructivists accept the anti-foundationalist ontology, i.e. world DOES NOT exist independently of our knowledge about it (link between structure and agent). • Constructivists accept positivist epistemology – hypothesis testing, causality, explanation (Hopf). • Positivist epistemology gives considerable legitimacy of the constructivists in their debate with the rationalists.
The importance of Social Context • The role of agency – IR evolves over time and changes based on the agential factors, not only on the structural imperatives of anarchy. • Constructivists emphasize on the role of (a) norms; (b) shared understandings and; (c) relationships between agency and structure. • IR world is not static (i.e. given a priori) but exists only by the virtue of human acts. • These human acts are called social facts because they happen in a specific cultural, historical and political context. • Verstehen tradition (Max Weber) – action must always be understood from within, i.e. “what is people’s heads.”
Variation in the Constructivist Tradition • Conventional Constructivism (middle ground) – does not reject the scientific assumptions of positivist science. • Conventional constructivism advocates “the middle ground” between positivism and post-structuralism, which includes social ontology and positivist epistemology (Wendt). • Critical Constructivism – challenges conventional constructivism. Critical constructivists highlight the inseparability of social ontology and epistemology (Zehfuss, Kratochwil). • The essence of the debate between the conventional and the critical constructivists is on the consistency of the method (Fierke).
Key Components of the Constructivist Analysis • Language as the Unit of Analysis: the core is the distinction between rules and their interpretation. The dichotomy of objective and subjective. • Hypothesis testing (H0 and H Alt) – how the language is put to use by social actors as they construct the world; focus on the meaning of the rules and norms as expressed by the subjects of analysis. • Constructivist causation: addresses the question “how possible.” The focus is on the public language and the intentions embedded into it. • Reason and Cause – a reason has a different logic than a cause (therefore, it is flawed to call a reason a cause). The reason is tied up to the meaning and opens up a possibility to for the other to be engaged and to respond.