The "third generation" of constructivism: what's new?

Authors

  • Tatyana A. Alekseeva Moscow State Institute of International Relations image/svg+xml Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18255/2412-6519-2022-1-6-21

Keywords:

constructivism, generational attitude, temporality, interpretivism, political realism, liberalism, marxism, social interactionism, communication, context

Abstract

Constructivism as a political theory since its start was quite pluralistic, being united by the chief idea - all the main aspects of international relations are socially constructed. That is why it is generally regarded to be a kind of “bridge” between the IT and social theory as such. The «generational» differences enrich the multitude of approaches. Nowadays already, the third generation of the constructivist theoreticians are at work. The constructivism had entered the scene at the time of the “Third Great debates”, or epistemological contradictions between the proponents of explanation, positivism and rationalism - from one side; and understanding (interpretivist attitude), from the other. However, the first generation had just marked the main attitudes, they were not precise enough to make them a science. They preferred to contemplate about the international problems, instead of analyze them. At the time of the second generation, constructivism was being recognized as a real alternative to political realism and liberalism as the most important theories of international relations and literally occupied the place, belonging before that to Marxism. At the time, the process of the «sciencefication» of constructivism took place. The third generation has brought something new and simultaneously has returned to some of the ideas, methods and theses of the first generation - back to social interactionism, discursive analyses, theories of communication, etc. The special attention it gives to the conditions and context.

Author Biography

  • Tatyana A. Alekseeva, Moscow State Institute of International Relations
    Doc. Sc (Philosophy), Professor

References

Matthews M. Time for Science Education. How Teaching the History and Philosophy of Pendulum Motion Can Contribute to Science Literacy. NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, 2000. 468 p.

Onuf N. Constructivism: A User's Manual // International Relations in a Constructed World. Ed. by V. Kubalkova, N. Onuf, P. Kowett. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, 1998. P. 58-78.

Theory and Application of the "Generation" in International Relations and Politics. Ed. by B. J. Steel, J. M. Acuff. NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012. 266 p.

Keohane R. O.International Institutions: Two Approaches // International Studies Quarterly. 1988. Vol. 32. № 4. P. 379-396.

Reus-Smit C. Theories of International Relations. Ed. by S. Burchill etc. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2015. P. 209-230.

Chernoff F. Theory and Metatheory in International Relations. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2008. 223 p.

Jackson R., Sørensen G.Introduction to International Relations: Theories and Approaches. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. 352 p.

Finnemore M., Sikkink K. Taking Stock: The Constructivist Research Program in International Relations and Comparative Politics // Annual Review of Political Science. 2001. № 4. P. 391-416.

Onuf N. The Politics of Constructivism. Constructing International Relations: the Next Generation // International Relations in a Constructed World. Ed. by K. Fierke, K. E. Jorgensen. Armonk: M.E. Sharpe, 2001. P. 236-254.

Waltz K. Man, the State and War. A Theoretical Analysis. NY: Columbia University Press, 1959. 263 p.

The Culture of National Security: Norms and Identity in World Politics. Ed. by P. J. Katzenstein. NY: Columbia University Press, 1996. 562 p.

Johnston A. I. Social States: China in International Institutions. 1980-2000. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2007. 290 p.

Kessler O., Steele B. J.Introduction: Constructing IR: The Third Generation // European Review of International Studies. 2016. Vol. 3. Issue 3. P. 7-13.

Бубер М. Я и Ты. М.: Высшая школа, 1993. 175 с.

Subotic J., Zarakol A. Cultural Intimacy in International Relations // European Journal of International Relations. 2013. Vol. 19. № 4. P. 915-938.

Zarakol A. After Defeat: How the East Learned to Live with the West. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. 312 p.

Сморгунов Л. В. Онтологические повороты в современной политической науке: в поисках адекватности политике // Социальные и гуманитарные знания. 2020. Том 6. С. 122-133.

Джордан Дж. Е., Сталберг А. Н., Троицкий М. Внешнеполитические ресурсы и инструменты в российско-американских отношениях // Международные процессы. 2021. Том 19. № 1. С. 6-25.

Кун Т. Структура научных революций. Москва: АСТ, 2009. 310 с.

Michel T. Third Generation Constructivism and the Rhetoric of Inquiry in International Relations // European Review of International Studies, Open Studies. 2016. Vol. 3. № 3. P. 5-19.

Jackson P. The Conduct of Inquiry in International Relations. Philosophy of Science and Its Implications for the Study of World Politics. Abingdon: Routledge, 2011. 283 p.

Tactical Constructivism, Method, and International Relations. Ed. by B. J. Steele, H. D. Gould, O. Kessler London and NY: Routledge, 2020. 254 p.

Downloads

Published

2022-03-24

Issue

Section

Political Science