Theory of International
Relations
Doc. D-r Snezana Bilic –
Sotiroska,
Ph.D in Economic Science
Assistant Professor
1
Fundamentals of Theory of IR

1 Worldviews and IR theory:
Conquest or coexistence?
Introduction to the diverse worldviews
that support contemporary
International Relations (IR) theory.
2
Worldviews and IR theory



Worldviews and theories in IR
A worldview is a broad interpretation
of the world and an application of
this view to the way in which we
judge and evaluate activities and
structures that shape the world.
In simpler terms, our worldview is ‘a
view of the world and a view for the
world’
3
Worldviews and IR theory




Worldviews have two interdependent
dimensions:
The first dimension is ontological.
Worldviews contain fundamental
assumptions and presuppositions about
the constitutive nature of IR.
Such assumptions or beliefs are our
most fundamental thoughts about the
nature of ‘being, existence, or reality, as
well as the basic categories of being and
their relations.
4
Worldviews and IR theory


The second dimension is evaluative
Worldviews is evaluative, providing
the basis for judging and prescribing
institutional arrangements and
principles of conduct with regard to
or within the parameters of IR.
5
Worldviews and IR theory

The importance of the distinction,
and the relationship between
ontology and evaulation, has been
noted by the philosopher Taylor
(1971) in the context of political
theory.
6
Worldviews and IR theory


‘Worldviews’ are not ‘theories’,
although these terms are often
conflated in the field of IR.
For example, an empirical theory is
an explanation of an event, or more
usually of a pattern of events.
• Why did the United States invade Iraq
in 2003?
• Why do wars take place?
• Why are some countries rich and others
poor?
7
Worldviews and IR theory

Realism, contains an identifiable set
of core principles, but the realist
worldview is itself an ideal-type, and
it is important to recognize the
limitations of trying to ‘fix’ the status
of realism within a discipline whose
very identity as a social science is
constantly debated.
8
Worldviews and IR theory




Conquest or coexistence?
The first response is self-evident.
One worldview is right and the
others are wrong.
Or we could express it in more
suitable terms: each of the
worldviews may generate interesting
insights, but one of them is far
superior to the others.
9
Worldviews and IR theory


To engage with such questions is to
enter the world of IR theory.
First, the subject matter of IR is
simply huge: war, demographic
change, state-making, global
warming, unequal development,
nationalism, the ‘war on terror’,
international organization, shifts in
power between the United States
and China – the central issue or
problem
10
Worldviews and IR theory


That should dominate the research
agenda in this field.
It is worth recalling that IR – as an
autonomous field of study in political
science
11
Worldviews and IR theory


Today, a whole host of issues
compete for our attention, and it
could be argued that one reason for
the increasing of worldviews is the
increasing of issues that each
worldview seeks to privilege.
Thus for realists, war between states
remains the central problem.
12
Worldviews and IR theory


For liberal internationalists, the
unequal distribution of political
freedom for individuals is the
problem.
For Marxists, the central issue is the
injustice of global capitalism and the
stratification of class on a global
scale.
13
Worldviews and IR theory


For critical theorists, it is the
needless suffering caused not just by
capitalism but also by other
dynamics of modernity at the global
level.
Constructivists focus less on
substantive issues than the broader
problem of how changes in states’
identities and interests can shift the
culture of IR from one of conflict to
one of cooperation.
14
Worldviews and IR theory


Members of the ‘English School’
broadly united by a shared concern
with the history, dynamics, and
future of something called
‘international society’.
Feminists are inspired by the ideal of
gender equality, and outraged by the
global consequences of what they
regard as the gendered character of
the modern sovereign state.
15
Worldviews and IR theory


Poststructuralists are interested in
the processes and practices that
make it possible to even conceive of
the domain of ‘international relations’
as a distinct field of political practice.
Finally, postcolonial theorists are
interested in the stories, identities,
and forms of political emancipation
available to the marginalized
members of the global South.
16
Grand Theories of International Relations
In its effort to find answers to extra-scientific political
and societal crises and problems, the science of
International Relations, over time, has produced a
number of different Grand Theories of international
politics, which try to understand its subject matter and
phenomena on the basis of:





different perspectives of perception/interpretation
different sets of questions
different anthropological
different normative and ethical
and different methodological predispositions and
presuppositions
Grand Theories of I.R. II


Grand Theories differ in view of their ontological
assumptions, i.e. those assumptions referring to
the nature of their research objects.
Grand Theories formulate different premisses and
assumptions regarding
 the international milieu, i.e. the characteristic outlook,
quality, and structure of the environment in which
international actors act
 the quality, character, and substance of international
actors themselves
 actors‘ aims and interests and the means which actors,
as a rule, use in the fulfillment of their aims and
interests.
Grand Theories and World Views




Each and every Grand Theory formulates a
characteristic world view of International Relations:
Grand Theories and their world views compete with
each other without offering science a possibility to
decide which of the Grand Theories is the (only)
correct representation of international reality.
If it would want to decide this question, science
would need a Hypothetical point (Archemedian
point) over and beyond the competition of the
Grand Theories, which would enable it to establish
firm criterias for deciding on the truth or falseness
of those premisses on which Grand Theories base
their ontological edifice.
This Archemedian point is nowhere in sight !!
Grand Theories of International
Relations
Grand Theory
Actor
Realism
Milieu
Structural
Principle
World of states
as an-archic
state of nature
Vertical
segmentation,
unlimited zerosum game for
power, influence,
ressources
World of states
as legally
constituted
society
Vertical
Segmentation,
zero-sum game
regulated by norm
and agreement
World society as
society of
individuals and
their
associations
Universalistic
constitution
Nation
State
English
School or
Rationalism
Idealism
Individual
Grand Theories of International Relations II
Grand Theory
Actor
Milieu
Structural
Principle
Interdependencyoriented
Globalism
Individual or
societal actors
Transnational
society
Functional
border-crossing
networks
Theories of
Imperialism
Individual or
societal actors
representing
class interests
International
class society
Border-crossing
horizontal
layering
Dependency
oriented
Globalism:
Dependency
Theories and
Theories of the
Capitalist world
system
Societal and
national actors
representing
class interests
World system of
Capitalism as
layering of
metropoles and
peripheries
Horizontal layering
of national actors in
the world system;
structural
dependence of
peripheries on
metropoles;
structural
heterogenity of
peripheries
Worldviews and IR theory


CONCLUSIONS:
Worldviews are necessary. They
frame the domain of IR and provide
the conceptual language and
fundamental assumptions (both
ontological and evaluative) on the
basis of which specific phenomena
and patterned relationships are
explained via theory.
22
Worldviews and IR theory



Contemporary IR theory exhibits a wide
variety of competing worldviews.
To be sure, they are not all mutually
exclusive.
Productive conversations can take, and
have taken, place between realists and
liberals over the dynamics of
cooperation among states and the
conditions for regime maintenance in a
variety of issue areas.
23
Worldviews and IR theory



Critical theory emerged from Marxism.
Whilst it is presented here as a distinctive
worldview, feminism is a multidimensional
worldview in which liberals, radicals, and
poststructuralists engage in dialogue with
one another.
Similarly, there is much overlap between
Marxism, critical theory, and postcolonialism.
24
Worldviews and IR theory


‘The English School’ is distinctive
in that its members explicitly
recognize a legitimate plurality of
‘traditions of international
thought’.
It is not difficult to find further
areas of actual and potential
overlap.
25
Worldviews and IR theory


A worldview on worldviews, or
perspective on perspectives, is
necessary in order to assess the
merits of alternative worldviews.
An appropriate starting point, is
to recognize IR as an extreme
manifestation of human tragedy.
26
Worldviews and IR theory


The question then becomes, to what
extent does each worldview provide
us with important insights into the
dynamics of tragedy and empower
us, if not to overcome it, at least to
ameliorate its effects?
This subject is an introduction to the
diverse ways in which IR theory can
assist ‘us’ in answering this central
question.
27
The first Great Debate
between Idealism and Realism
Thank you for the
attention
e-mail:
sbilicsotiroska@yahoo.com
29