Protean power as a plea for an open social ontology, non-efficient causal explanations, and cautious political practice

IF 2.2 1区社会学 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

International Theory Pub Date : 2020-08-17 DOI:10.1017/S1752971920000287

Stefano Guzzini

引用次数: 2

Abstract

Abstract This paper probes the attempt to use power analysis to link three domains: ontology, explanation, and the strategy of political actors. It shows how Katzenstein and Seybert develop an open social ontology that serves as the backdrop for explanations that need to be causal but indeterminate, and a cautious political practice. It exposes tensions in two important links. First, the open ontology becomes retranslated as an explanatory cause. Second, the call for being cautious because of ‘unknown unknowns’ may just as well invite strategies of doubling down in control power.

查看原文本刊更多论文

多变的权力是对开放的社会本体论、无效的因果解释和谨慎的政治实践的请求

摘要本文探讨了使用权力分析来连接三个领域的尝试：本体论、解释和政治行为者的策略。它展示了Katzenstein和Seybert如何发展出一种开放的社会本体论，作为解释的背景，这些解释需要是因果的但不确定的，以及谨慎的政治实践。它暴露了两个重要环节的紧张关系。首先，开放本体论被重新翻译为一个解释原因。其次，由于“未知的未知因素”而呼吁保持谨慎，这可能会引发加倍控制权力的策略。

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

International Theory Multiple-

CiteScore

6.60

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Editorial board International Theory (IT) is a peer reviewed journal which promotes theoretical scholarship about the positive, legal, and normative aspects of world politics respectively. IT is open to theory of absolutely all varieties and from all disciplines, provided it addresses problems of politics, broadly defined and pertains to the international. IT welcomes scholarship that uses evidence from the real world to advance theoretical arguments. However, IT is intended as a forum where scholars can develop theoretical arguments in depth without an expectation of extensive empirical analysis. IT’s over-arching goal is to promote communication and engagement across theoretical and disciplinary traditions. IT puts a premium on contributors’ ability to reach as broad an audience as possible, both in the questions they engage and in their accessibility to other approaches. This might be done by addressing problems that can only be understood by combining multiple disciplinary discourses, like institutional design, or practical ethics; or by addressing phenomena that have broad ramifications, like civilizing processes in world politics, or the evolution of environmental norms. IT is also open to work that remains within one scholarly tradition, although in that case authors must make clear the horizon of their arguments in relation to other theoretical approaches.