From: rgroff-AT-yorku.ca
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 14:19:00 -0500
Subject: Re: BHA: Essay on post-structuralism in IR


Hi Daniel,

Your essay sounds as though it will be very interesting.  There are others on
the list who know all about critical realism and IR, so I will only offer some
very general thoughts.

It sounds as though the thesis that you want to defend is: CR as a philosophy of
social science/theory of society either contains or can allow for insights from
post-structuralist IR theory, but does not have the problems that
post-structuralist IR theory has (or that post-structuralism/post-modernism as
philosophies of social science have).  

Have I got this right?

Thought 1:  
If I were you, I'd slightly re-conceive your outline so that it is clear that
points 1-3 are, for your purposes in the present essay, background.  With
increasing specificity, they amount to you setting the stage for your
intervention (i.e., your thesis, which is both stated and defended (in outline)
in point #4.)  And I'd give much less time to #s 1 and 2 than to 3.

As a reader, I'd want to see the bulk of the discussion be the argument that you
set out in point #4, since that is the actual case that you intend to present in
support of your thesis.   


Thought 2:
I don't know how long your essay is, but you set out an enormous amount of
ground in this outline.  You might be able to handle fewer issues more deeply.


Thought 3:
It might be worth making some distinction in your analysis between those aspects
of CR (and also of the post-structuralist works that interest you) that are
philosophy of social science/epistemology and those parts that are substantive
social theory.  This is not a neat line, but still, theories about what a
scientific law is do not have the same object-domain as theories about what a
state is, for example.  You could then very clearly say things like "Some po-mo
theories about states (or international processes or whatever) are okay, but the
po-mo meta-theory sucks (or whatever)."  At a minimum, it seems to me, it would
be helpful to be clear about whether you are dealing with *CR* only as it is
expressed in social scientific claims having to do with IR or also as a theory
of explanation, theory-preference, causal realism, etc.


Sorry I don't know the relevant CR-IR literature!  Sorry too if this is more
distraction than anything.

Good luck, and let us know how it goes!

Ruth


     --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---