Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: In making the case for the scientific study of ideas in international politics, Alexander Wendt’s version of scientific realism preserved many vestiges of the positivist model of science. In order to retain scientific legitimacy within a discipline whose philosophical vision has not yet discarded the mistaken conflation of science and positivism, Wendt constructed a middle way between the alleged positivist/interpretivist dichotomy, rather than fully rejecting both altogether and turning to the fundamentally different alternative offered by philosophical realism. This chapter will explain how the failure to complete the break with the positivist model of science, as well as the adoption of certain interpretivist positions, has distorted and undermined his presentation of scientific realism, created confusion around the content and implications of realism, and compromised the valuable philosophical potential of his wider project. Given the great importance and widespread impact of Wendt’s contributions in IR to the understanding of scientific realism in particular and knowledge of philosophy of science in general, this chapter is devoted to examining, revising, and, where appropriate, correcting several components of Wendt’s presentation of scientific realism, especially regarding the realist positions on ontology, epistemology, the structure-agent relationship, and the emergent, enduring, and causal properties of material and ideational social structures. The chapter finishes by discussing how Wendt’s (idealist) metaphysics ended up privileging his (constructivist) substantive theory, highlighting what, for realists, are the serious repercussions of his Via Media. The intention is to maintain and further Wendt’s philosophical objectives in the scientific study of “the social” while overcoming the limitations inherent in his presentation of scientific realism, and thus clarifying these vital theoretical issues for our discipline.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Aron is amongst the best known thinkers of the twentieth century. He is also one of the few front rank political thinkers to have devoted a good deal of his work explicitly to the problem of international relations. Yet whereas the work of French theorists trip of the tongues of contemporary IR theorists without a second thought, Aron has been surprisingly neglected - some honorable exceptions (like Stanley Hoffmann) excepted. This paper seeks to offer a reinterpretation of Aron's international thought, linking it to his philosophical ideas more generally and to his historical, political and polemical writings as well. It will also argue against the interpretations of Aron's international thought contained in excellent studies such as Mahoney's Liberal Political Science of Raymond Aron, and Andersons equally excellent Aron: The Recovery of the Political. Instead it will offer an account of Aron's international thought as what I term a 'Cartesian Realism' a particular blend of liberal and realist thought that still has much to offer contemporary students of world politics. The paper will close, finally, with a critique and assessment of Aron's 'Carteisan realism'.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Of all the American policymakers who helped create the postwar international security order, none loom larger than Dean Acheson. As the principal architect of the Truman Doctrine, the Marshall Plan, and NATO, he established the central pillars of American national security policy for more than a generation.

Yet we know next to nothing about the formative influences on his thought. My project identifies the assumptions underlying his policy perspectives by focusing on his professional background—as a New Deal lawyer immersed in the political and ideological struggles of the 1920’s and the Great Depression. Understanding the complex and subtle connections between law and world politics can yield important insights into a critical period in the history of American foreign relations. It would also bring together American legal history, the history of American foreign relations, and international theory.

Acheson, I argue, was one of the leaders of the legal “Realist” movement that stressed the interconnection of law and politics, and thus the deep connection of law and power. Law did not substitute for power but rather reflected it. His diplomacy stressed similar themes and thereby rejected classical legal premises. It relied heavily on balance-of-power conceptions and remained indifferent, if not hostile, to international legal institutions. Acheson’s career, then, suggests that “legal Realism” and “foreign policy Realism” are not simply matters of linguistic fortuity. Instead, taken together they point to a deeper understanding of "realism" in 20th century thought.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Realist IR scholars have become increasingly committed to the canons of positivist social science. Contemporary realist theorizing largely presupposes a strict separation of subject and object, emphasizing ?theory testing? and ?prediction? as touchstones of social science. For example, Stephen Walt noted with satisfaction that security studies (which ?fits comfortably within the realist paradigm?) ?adopted the norms and objectives of social science,? including the development of theories and ?the testing [of} their predictions against a scientifically selected body of evidence.? And John Mearsheimer urged scholars to ?use their theories to make predictions about the future . . . The world can be used as a laboratory to decide which theories best explain international politics.? If the world is a laboratory, it is incumbent upon realist theorists to detach themselves from the political events anticipated by their theories in the same manner that, say, a chemist avoids intervening in the experimental processes underway in his lab. In practice, however, realist IR scholars often intervene in political reality. They consult national security agencies, whisper in the ears of decision makers, write op-ed pieces, give interviews, and sign petitions in an attempt to influence policy and shape political events. For example, in recent months realists of all stripes have engaged in an overt political campaign against U.S. policy in Iraq. In their actual practices, then, realist scholars attempt to construct and re-construct political reality without realizing that the very act of their political intervention subverts the neat subject-object separation presupposed by their theories. By abandoning positivist presuppositions and drawing instead on constructivist approaches that regard purpose and analysis as ?part and parcel of a single process? (E. H. Carr), realists could greatly reduce the dissonance between their epistemological principles and their actual practices.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Women with larger body types are underrepresented and presented negatively on television. It is possible that program context may influence perceived reality of various women’s body types. Two experiments found that while the body type of an actress had little effect in a domestic setting, larger women were perceived as less realistic and less likely to get a television role if the program was in a professional setting. The results have implications for both how audiences judge body types and for how audiences make realism judgments.