c5bc4523-3f19-4ad4-9a99-0749d6e516b6.pdf

Created by Turbolearn AI Understanding Theories in International Relations Theories as Stories Theories in International Relations (IR) are not objective truths, but rather sophisticated stories told by scholars to make sense of the world. These stories are connected...

Created by Turbolearn AI Understanding Theories in International Relations Theories as Stories Theories in International Relations (IR) are not objective truths, but rather sophisticated stories told by scholars to make sense of the world. These stories are connected to one of three worlds: World Conflict, World Cooperation, and World Inequality. "There is no such thing as a theory divorced from a perspective and interest." - Robert Cox This means that every theory is implicitly claiming that one of these worlds is the correct representation of reality. The Function of Theory Theories simplify complex worlds by identifying the few important things that matter. However, there is no agreement on what these important things are, and the answer depends on one's perspective. Theory World Perspective Realism World Conflict Conflict is the primary driver of international relations World Cooperation is the primary driver of international Liberalism Cooperation relations Economic inequality is the primary driver of international Marxism World Inequality relations Theories and Ideology Theories and ideology are often confused, but they are distinct. Theories acknowledge their perspective and interest, while ideology denies them. "Ideology will pretend to be true, but it is not." - Robert Cox Page 1  Created by Turbolearn AI Theories and Change Theories can be used to manage change or promote change. Different theories have different views on change, and these views are shaped by their underlying world and perspective. Theory View on Change Realism Change is something to be feared and managed through conflict Liberalism Change is something to be promoted through cooperation Marxism Change is necessary to address economic inequality Theories and Structure vs. Agency Theories can emphasize either structure or agency as the primary driver of international relations. Theory Emphasis Structuralism Structure (e.g. alliance systems, global financial regimes) Agency-based theories Agency (e.g. individual actors, state leaders) Implications of Theories Theories have implications for how we understand the world and how we address global problems. They can also be used to justify or critique different policies and actions. Theories can be used to justify or critique the use of force in international relations. Theories can be used to justify or critique the role of international institutions in promoting cooperation. Theories can be used to justify or critique the distribution of wealth and power in the world.## The Structure-Agency Debate The structure-agency debate is a fundamental concept in International Relations (IR) that revolves around the question of whether structures or agents are the primary drivers of global policy outcomes. Page 2  Created by Turbolearn AI Structure vs. Agency Structure: Refers to the impersonal, underlying forces that shape the behavior of agents. These can include institutions, norms, and power dynamics. Agency: Refers to the actions and decisions of empowered actors, such as states, transnational corporations, or individuals. "Structures are like the furniture of the world. Once we commit to one of the worlds, our claims about human nature and other things are like the things that we fill that world with as though it were furniture in order to make sense of why it is the way we think it." Theories and Their Commitments Theories in IR differ in their commitments to: Epistemology: The study of knowledge and how we can know something. Positivism, which involves applying the scientific method to the study of the social world, is a common epistemology in IR. Ontology: The study of existence and the assumptions we make about the world. Ontological commitments are the starting assumptions we make in order for a theory to work. Theory Epistemology Ontology Positivism Scientific method Assumes a objective reality Constructivism Interpretive approach Assumes a socially constructed reality The Discipline of International Relations International Relations is a relatively young discipline that emerged as a separate field of study after World War I. Key Features of a Discipline: A community of scholars who see themselves as working within the same field A general agreement on the objects of study and the questions that scholars should ask A central story or narrative that defines the discipline Page 3  Created by Turbolearn AI The Great Debates in IR The discipline of IR is characterized by a series of great debates between different theoretical perspectives on global politics. These debates are often organized around three main approaches: Idealism: A perspective that emphasizes the potential for cooperation and peace in international relations. Realism: A perspective that emphasizes the role of power and self-interest in international relations. Liberalism: A perspective that emphasizes the importance of institutions and cooperation in promoting peace and stability. These approaches will be explored in more detail in the coming weeks.## Idealism in International Relations Idealism in International Relations emerged in the aftermath of World War I, with scholars arguing that the war was caused by misunderstandings between leaders and a lack of democratic accountability within states. Key Assumptions of Idealism Leaders had few checks on their authority, leading to aggressive preparations and mutual suspicion. The underlying tensions that led to war could have been removed through the spread of democratic institutions. Humans have a natural inclination to cooperate, and the development of international institutions can harness this inclination to prevent war. "Good men, good women don't want war as a result of misunderstanding or dominance of unending. There's a common humanity that we share which can be hard to say purpose or the purpose of our art would be to find ways to harness that modern humanity in international institutions that would ensure equitable collective certainty." The League of Nations and the Failure of Idealism Page 4  Created by Turbolearn AI The League of Nations, established after World War I, was a key institution in the idealist approach to international relations. However, its failure to prevent the outbreak of World War II led to a re-evaluation of idealist assumptions. Institution Description League of Established after World War I to promote international cooperation Nations and prevent future wars United Nations Successor to the League of Nations, established after World War II Realism in International Relations Realism emerged as a response to idealism, with scholars arguing that the idealist approach was overly optimistic about human nature and the potential for international cooperation. Key Assumptions of Realism Humans are prone to conflict, and this is particularly evident at the international level where there is no higher authority to impose nonviolent settlements on disputes. States are primarily motivated by a desire for power and security in an anarchic system. Founding Texts of Realism Author Book Year E.H. Carr The Twenty Years' Crisis 1939 Hans Morgenthau Politics Among Nations 1948 Morgenthau's Theory of International Relations Morgenthau's theory centers on the purposeful actions of states in an anarchic system. He argues that the lack of a higher authority at the international level means that states must rely on their own power and security measures to protect themselves. Page 5  Created by Turbolearn AI "The reason that the world is the way it is, is because of basic human nature. People are prone to conflict, no matter how they organize themselves." Comparison of Idealism and Realism Idealism Realism View of Human Humans are naturally Humans are prone to conflict Nature inclined to cooperate International institutions International institutions are limited Role of can harness human in their ability to prevent war due to International cooperation to prevent the anarchic nature of the Institutions war international system States are motivated by a Primary Motivation States are primarily motivated by a desire for cooperation and of States desire for power and security mutual benefit window.MathJax = { tex: { inlineMath: [['$', '$'], ['\\(', '\\)']], displayMath: [['$$', '$$'], ['\\[', '\\]']] } }; Page 6