Understanding international relations from the internal point of view

TY - JOUR

T1 - Understanding international relations from the internal point of view

AU - Frost, Mervyn

AU - Lechner, Silviya

PY - 2016/10/1

Y1 - 2016/10/1

N2 - The article is written in response to a recent flurry of studies on international practices. In investigating this theme, IR scholars have drawn on diverse traditions in sociology, philosophy and organisational theory such as Bourdieu’s theory of practice, Dewey’s and James’s pragmatism, communities of practice approach, and action network theory. One preliminary question presupposed by these investigations however is: what standpoint (if any) enables us to make sense of international practices? Our central thesis is that the proper understanding of practices—including international ones—requires the internal point of view (practice internalism). To make our case, we develop an analytic distinction between two basic standpoints: practice externalism, represented by Adler and Pouliot’s approach to international practices, and practice internalism, represented by Wittgensteinian philosopher Peter Winch. Following Winch we argue that the practice of social science is externalist, and point to the limitations of an analysis of international practices predicated on externalist, social scientific premises.

AB - The article is written in response to a recent flurry of studies on international practices. In investigating this theme, IR scholars have drawn on diverse traditions in sociology, philosophy and organisational theory such as Bourdieu’s theory of practice, Dewey’s and James’s pragmatism, communities of practice approach, and action network theory. One preliminary question presupposed by these investigations however is: what standpoint (if any) enables us to make sense of international practices? Our central thesis is that the proper understanding of practices—including international ones—requires the internal point of view (practice internalism). To make our case, we develop an analytic distinction between two basic standpoints: practice externalism, represented by Adler and Pouliot’s approach to international practices, and practice internalism, represented by Wittgensteinian philosopher Peter Winch. Following Winch we argue that the practice of social science is externalist, and point to the limitations of an analysis of international practices predicated on externalist, social scientific premises.

KW - practice theory; international practices; practice; internal point of view; international political theory

U2 - 10.1177/1755088215596765

DO - 10.1177/1755088215596765

M3 - Article

SN - 1755-0882

VL - 12

SP - 299

EP - 319

JO - Journal of International Political Theory

JF - Journal of International Political Theory

IS - 3

ER -