Search

Despite the divide in ethical theorizing between deontological and consequentialist traditions, I argue that for most international relations scholars concerned with ethical argument, the deontological and the consequentialist concerns are intimately linked. One reason that many constructivist norms scholars have focused so clearly on careful empirical research is that we believe (at least implicitly) that we need to know something about the empirical consequences of norms in order to judge their ethical desirability. But we lack more explicit and systematic guidelines about how to link principles and consequences in ethical argument. My discussion examines related questions of consequences, comparison, and counterfactuals to try to offer some insights for normative thinking from the realm of empirical constructivism. I illustrate my arguments with reference to two current human rights issues: the debate over the U.S. use of torture and the debate over the impact of the increasing use of global human rights trials. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

x ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Combines the insights of constructivist theory with the growing recognition that ideologies are important to the constitution and behavior of U.S. political parties. Assessment of the connections between ideology and foreign policy, parties and foreign policy and partisanship and ideology in the U.S.; Theoretical implications of the growing ideological partisanship in the U.S.; Suggestions of the terms ideology and worldview.