International/Global Political Sociology

Dirk Nabers, Frank A. Stengel
{"title":"International/Global Political Sociology","authors":"Dirk Nabers, Frank A. Stengel","doi":"10.1093/acrefore/9780190846626.013.371","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"International Political Sociology (IPS) emerged as a subfield of International Relations (IR) in the early 2000s. IPS itself may be understood as constituted by a field of tension between the concepts of “the International,” “the Political,” and “the Social.” Against this background, the centrality of anarchy and sovereignty as the fundamental structuring principles of international politics are increasingly called into question. While IPS remains an exciting, creative and important endeavor, researchers are also exploring paths toward what might be called a Global Political Sociology (GPS). Although IPS has become more global in orientation, more sociological with respect to sources, and more political in its stance, three ongoing shifts need to be made in order to transform IPS into GPS: first, insights from disciplines foreign to IR—both Western and non-Western—need to be employed in order to illustrate that specific localities have implications for the global as a whole; second, the continued engagement with causal theorizing must be replaced with contingency and undecidability as the fundamental constituting features of the political; and third, if the international that has been the nucleus of IR activities for decades, but impedes our understanding of politics instead of stimulating it, then alternative ways of theorizing global politics must be explored.","PeriodicalId":166032,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Research Encyclopedia of International Studies","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oxford Research Encyclopedia of International Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190846626.013.371","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

International Political Sociology (IPS) emerged as a subfield of International Relations (IR) in the early 2000s. IPS itself may be understood as constituted by a field of tension between the concepts of “the International,” “the Political,” and “the Social.” Against this background, the centrality of anarchy and sovereignty as the fundamental structuring principles of international politics are increasingly called into question. While IPS remains an exciting, creative and important endeavor, researchers are also exploring paths toward what might be called a Global Political Sociology (GPS). Although IPS has become more global in orientation, more sociological with respect to sources, and more political in its stance, three ongoing shifts need to be made in order to transform IPS into GPS: first, insights from disciplines foreign to IR—both Western and non-Western—need to be employed in order to illustrate that specific localities have implications for the global as a whole; second, the continued engagement with causal theorizing must be replaced with contingency and undecidability as the fundamental constituting features of the political; and third, if the international that has been the nucleus of IR activities for decades, but impedes our understanding of politics instead of stimulating it, then alternative ways of theorizing global politics must be explored.
国际/全球政治社会学
国际政治社会学(IPS)在21世纪初作为国际关系(IR)的一个子领域出现。IPS本身可以被理解为由“国际”、“政治”和“社会”概念之间的紧张领域构成。在这种背景下,作为国际政治基本结构原则的无政府状态和主权的中心地位日益受到质疑。虽然IPS仍然是一个令人兴奋的、创造性的和重要的努力,研究人员也在探索可能被称为全球政治社会学(GPS)的道路。虽然IPS在方向上变得更加全球化,在来源方面更加社会学,在立场上更加政治化,但为了将IPS转变为GPS,需要进行三个持续的转变:首先,需要采用来自外国学科的见解-无论是西方还是非西方-以说明特定地区对全球整体的影响;其次,对因果理论的持续参与必须被偶然性和不可确定性所取代,作为政治理论的基本构成特征;第三,如果国际关系几十年来一直是国际关系活动的核心,但它阻碍了我们对政治的理解,而不是促进了政治,那么就必须探索将全球政治理论化的其他方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信