Pragmatism and International Relations

Lost in translation: a critique of constructivist norm research

“…9 Thus, the critique that Axel Honneth has levelled against the conceptualisation of culture in early critical theory can be applied equally to constructivist norm research: It has failed to demonstrate 'that socialized subjects are not simply passively subjected to an anonymous steering process but, rather, actively participate with their own interpretative performances in the complex process of social integration' (Honneth 1987: 355). 10 This argument obviously draws on the ideas from the tradition of American Pragmatism where reality is constantly in flux and beliefs, understood as 'rules for action', are questioned and put to the test in indeterminate situations of crisis, leaving the actor in doubt (Hellmann 2009(Hellmann : 638-41, 2010Roos 2010: 56-59). 11 This conception of structures of meaning is different from the conceptualisation of stable political cultures or unequivocal normative structures that prevail in norm research literature.…”

“…In such 'problematic situations', actors are in need of developing new beliefs to guide and (re)stabilise actions. Situations of this kind can be conceptualised as crises in which doubt prevails and which require the invention of a creative solution (Wagner et al 2006: 14-19;Hellmann 2009Hellmann : 639-40, 2010. Thus, situated creativity also refers to the ability of agents to cope with crises, for example by (re)interpreting existing norms or choosing different ones for reference.…”

A Beckian Critique of the ‘International’

“…Çalışma alanının yaşadığı yorumsamacı (interpretative), linguistik, kültürcü, eleştirel, inşacı, post-yapısalcı vb. dönüşümler de ulusal durumun düşünüş şeklinin epeyce dışına çıkmakla birlikte, sıklıkla incelemelerini bireysel ya da toplumsal aktörlerin politik gelişmeleri anlamlandırmaları üzerine kurmuşlar ve metodolojik ulusçuluğu aşmak noktasında fazlaca yardımcı olmamışlardır (Bakınız Kratochwil, 1989;Onuf, 1989;Wendt, 1992;Friedrichs and Kratochwil, 2009;Hellmann, 2009b;Hellmann ve Jorgensen 2015). Benzer şekilde Soğuk Savaş sonrasında yeniden artan yapı-özne tartışmaları da gerek uluslararası sistemi gerekse ulusal/uluslararası ikiliğini epistemolojik anlamda aşacak yöntemler üretmemişlerdir (Wendt, 1987;Dessler, 1989;Friedman and Starr, 1997;Wight, 1999).…”

Beyond (Post)Positivism: The Missed Promises of Systemic Pragmatism1

“…Although recognized as the American philosophy par excellence, Pragmatism has curiously never really impacted the ''American'' field of IR (Hellmann 2009b). And while it has at times been considered a ''via tertia'' that could provide a way out of the debate between rationalism and empiricism (Smith 1996:23), Pragmatism was only recently considered as an alternative epistemology for IR (for example, Pragmatism in International Relations Theory 2002;Widmaier 2004;Rytövuori-Apunen 2005;Kratochwil 2007;Bauer and Brighi 2008;Hellmann 2009a). The objective of this paper is not to reiterate the arguments of these valuable contributions but to explore Pragmatism through one of its proponents within IR theory, thereby ending the field's odd ignorance of the presence of an American Pragmatist in its own ranks.…”