Truth and Method: Identity, Science and Political Horizons
  • Siba N. Grovogui
Part of the Culture and Religion in International Relations book series (CRIR)


It is an ordinary requirement of the scientific enterprise that scholars occasionally revisit the epistemological and ontological grounds of their disciplinary approaches. This is the spirit of the present project. It seeks to revisit the methods and assumptions of the discipline of international relations (or IR). It is based upon the understanding that science, philosophy, and narratives often lag in their appreciation of the world. To paraphrase Michel-Rolph Trouillot, theoretical and historical accounts of global events (or “what is said to have happened”) seldom correspond with what actually happened.1 All accounts of international relations must omit crucial dimensions of the object of inquiry. These gaps between “accounts” and “reality” and their effects and consequences provide the space for inquiry. This is why “normal science” requires occasional revisiting of “what is said to have happened.”


Foreign Policy Moral Order International Order North Atlantic Treaty Organization International Morality 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Michel-Rolph Trouillot, Silencing the Past: Power and the Production of History (Boston: Beacon Press, 1995), 1–30.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Charles W. Kegley, Jr., “The Neoidealist Moment in International Studies? Realist Myths and the New International Realities,” International Studies Quarterly, no. 37 (1993), 131–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 7.
    See Steve Smith, Ken Booth, and Marysia Zalewski, International Theory: Positivism and Beyond (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 8.
    Gene M. Lyons and Michel Mastanduno, Beyond Westphalia? (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1995)Google Scholar
  5. Thom Kuehls, Beyond Sovereign Territory (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1996).Google Scholar
  6. 9.
    Mervyn Frost, Ethics in International Relations: A Constitutive Theory (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 10.
    For a range, see, for instance, Andrew Linklater, “The Problem of Community in International Relations,” Alternatives, xv (1990)Google Scholar
  8. Chris Brown, International Relations Theory: New Normative Approaches (New York: Columbia University Press, 1992)Google Scholar
  9. Martha Finnemore, National Interests in International Society (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996).Google Scholar
  10. 12.
    See, for instance, V. Spike Peterson, “Transgressing Boundaries: Theories of Knowledge, Gender and International Relations,” Millennium: Journal of International Studies, vol. 21, no. 2 (1992), 183–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 13.
    Margaret E. Keck and Kathryn Sikkink, Activists Beyond Borders (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1998).Google Scholar
  12. 15.
    Francis Fukuyama, The End of History and the Last Man (New York: Perennial, 2002).Google Scholar
  13. 16.
    Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order (New York: Simon & Schuster, c. 1996).Google Scholar
  14. 17.
    Michael W. Doyle, “Kant, Liberal Legacies, and Foreign Affairs,” Philosophy and Public Affairs, vol. 12, nos. 3 and 4 (1983), 205–235 and 323–353.Google Scholar
  15. 19.
    For illustrations on these points, see, for instance, Robert O. Keohane, ed., Neorealism and Its Critics (New York: Columbia University Press, 1986)Google Scholar
  16. David A. Baldwin, ed., Neorealism and Neoliberalism: The Contemporary Debate (New York: Columbia University Press, 1993)Google Scholar
  17. John Fitzpatrick, “The Anglo-American School of International Relations: The Tyranny of A-Historical Culturalism,” Australian Outlook, vol. 41 (1987), 45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ole Wæver, “The Sociology of a Not So International Discipline: American and European Developments in International Relations,” International Organization, vol. 52, no. 4 (1998), 687–727CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Stanley Hoffmann, “An American Social Science: International Relations,” Daedalus, vol. 3, no. 106 (1977), 41–60Google Scholar
  20. Ken Booth, “75 Years On: Rewriting The Subject’s Past—Reinventing Its Future,” in Steve Smith et al., eds., International Theory: Positivism and Beyond (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), 331, 328–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 20.
    Thomas Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970), 23–34.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Marianne H. Marchand, “Different Communities/Different Realities/ Different Encounters: A Reply to J. Ann Tickner,” International Studies Quarterly, vol. 42, no. 1 (March 1998), 199–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 24.
    Anthony G. Hopkins, The Future of the Imperial Past (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997).Google Scholar
  24. 25.
    See, for instance, Claude Paillat, Vingt Ans qui Déchirèrent la France (Paris: Editions Robert Laffont, 1972), vol. II.Google Scholar
  25. 28.
    F. H. Hinsley, Sovereignty (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986)Google Scholar
  26. Robert H. Jackson, Quasi-States: Sovereignty, International Relations and the Third World (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993).Google Scholar
  27. 29.
    See Stephen Krasner, “Realism, Imperialism, and Democracy: A Response to Gilbert,” Political Theory, vol. 20, no. 1 (1992), 48–49 and Jackson, Quasi-States, 202.Google Scholar
  28. 31.
    I borrow the expression and its formulation from Naomi Schor, Bad Objects: Essays Popular and Unpopular (Durham: Duke University Press, 1995), 1–17.Google Scholar
  29. 33.
    Both this image and arguments are taken from V. Y. Mudimbe, ed., The Surreptitious Speech: Présence Africaine and the Politics of Otherness, 1947–1987 (Chicago University of Chicago Press, 1992).Google Scholar
  30. 36.
    Michel Foucault, Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings, 1972–1977, Colin Gordon, ed. (New York: Pantheon, 1980), 78–133.Google Scholar
  31. 37.
    John Gerard Ruggie, Constructing the World Polity (London: Routledge, 1998), 62–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 38.
    Jens Bartelson, A Genealogy of Sovereignty (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), 6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 39.
    See, for instance, David A. Baldwin, ed., Neorealism and Neoliberalism: The Contemporary Debate (New York: Columbia University Press, 1993), 3.Google Scholar
  34. 40.
    Nicholas Onuf, The Republican Legacy in International Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 173–190.Google Scholar
  35. 41.
    Dispesh Chakrabarty, Provincializing Europe: Postcolonial Thought and Historical Difference (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000, 45), 16.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Siba N. Grovogui 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Siba N. Grovogui

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations