International Relations as a Social Science

Рет қаралды 74,215

11 жыл бұрын

Speakers: Professor Iver Neumann
Recorded on Monday 28 January 2013 in New Theatre, East Building.
One origin of the social sciences lies in opposition to the discipline of history. Rather than speculating about the course of history generally, the idea was to look at the variation in forms of social life. The social sciences are not alone in attempting this. Other approaches to such a study may be found in psychology and biology. Drawing on Durkheim and Mauss, Professor Iver Neumann will begin with a discussion of how these different but overlapping approaches stand today, when the psychologising approach of methodological individualism and the biologising thrust towards stressing the genetic make-up of the species are on the rise. Stressing how humans are a meaning-producing species, and so bound to be living in a condition of alterity, Professor Iver Neumann will make the case for privileging social causes in the study of social life. Professor Iver Neumann will go on to discuss the specificity of International Relations (IR) relative to other social sciences. IR's sensibilities to alterity on all levels of political life means that it is an apt tradition from which to cope with the globalisation that defines the age. Crucially, however, for such analyses to be meaningful, they have to pay attention to the sundry social fields within which global politics now play out. The large-scale hybridization that goes with globalization means that we can no longer afford to analyse social and political life in terms of pre-social ideas about the state, war, diplomacy etc. The study of top-level decision making cannot neglect the everyday, and vice versa. This is why we should be meticulous in insisting on IR being first and foremost a social science.
Iver Neumann is the Montague Burton Professor of International Relations, LSE.

Пікірлер: 17

@sariarianipratiwi3529 2 жыл бұрын

The study of top-level decision making cannot neglect the everyday, and vice versa ---- with regulation, evidence, many letters, kebijakan dan kebijaksanaan publik bila tidak memungkinkan atau ada dampak buruk dari keputusan berdasarkan aturan

@emmanuelufot4947 9 жыл бұрын

This was a very inspiring lecture.

@yellowburger 5 жыл бұрын

History is good. IR needs history. But the contemporary relevance of Durkheim, Weber, and Marx has little to do with their historical studies. It has to do with their meta-theory. Their historical studies now look quite ethnocentric and dated, as will contemporary historical studies in the eyes of future generations. But this does not mean historical studies are rubbish. To the extent that they provide a foundation for meta-theory they are indispensable. But in the end, they can never be "scientific." IR is in essence an "interpretivist" study, not a science in the natural sciences sense of the term.

@joaquinalvajack1009 3 жыл бұрын

yellowburger Yes it is true it cannot be scientific as in natural science do , but obviously he uses the methodology of social science. The meta theory cannot also be considered as scientific theory, since natural science requires strict compliance to their falsification method among others. Corollary to this argument social science cannot be called science, but only natural science.

@noneone............. 3 жыл бұрын

Let's learn IR ! 🇬🇧♥️

@shyamlalbharti3153 3 жыл бұрын

,#International Relations as a Social Science.....??/#To,The Nation's of all World. #Mere Priyon, "What is Relationship.....??/#Rishte Ak Paqchhiya nahin ho Saktaa, Jub tuk Doonon Paqchh ki Chaahut+Aatmik Sneinh mein; Doo Dil Ak Aatmaa na ho jaaye Tub tuk Relationship ki Pahchaan nahin ban Sakte"!!Mere Priyon," Jish Riste ka Dabaav Shyam par Daalnaa Chaahte ho,Vo Veinshaafi hain! Jish bhi Bhaai nein Question kiyaa hai," Vo Abhi Bhaavnaa Jagat se Pourn Unbhigya hai"!!Thank's.....#Aapka Apnaa:Shyam Lal Rajvanshi/" WISDOM OF KING" BHARAT.