Affiliation:
1. University of Minnesota and Kent State University
Abstract
As presently constituted, the analysis of `ideas' is deficient in two key respects. First, despite presenting itself as an alternative to the dominant rationalist perspective on international relations and foreign policy, the turn to `ideas' represents only a minor modification of that tradition, rather than a serious challenge to it. Second, the retention of the rationalist framework has had problematical implications for how `ideas' are conceptualized. Although explicitly defined as shared beliefs, we argue that the metaphors structuring rationalist analyses lead them to conceptualize `ideas' as objects. As an alternative, we offer a constructivist account of ideas as `symbolic technologies' that enable the production of representations. This different metaphor enables us to address directly the difficulties for analysis stemming from a conception of ideas as objects. It also opens up for examination a range of empirical phenomena overlooked by rationalist analysts.
Subject
Political Science and International Relations,Sociology and Political Science
Cited by
156 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Emotion and Affect in World Politics;World Economy and International Relations;2024
2. Effects of international norms: A typology;Journal of International Political Theory;2023-06-30
3. “Vision of Itself” in Foreign Policy Analysis: From the Role of Ideas to Identity and Recognition;Teoria Polityki;2022-10-19
4. Introduction;The Routledge Handbook of Ideology and International Relations;2022-09-06
5. Credibility dilemmas under the Paris agreement: explaining fossil fuel subsidy reform references in INDCs;International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics;2022-06-22