Search

The French International Relations (IR) discipline has for a long time existed at the margins of the Anglo-American mainstream. Most of its contributions are hardly connected with the theoretical debate s that have intrigued, and still intrigue, IR scholars elsewhere. As a narrative device, a more detailed account of the three generations of French IR theory - a theoretical scholarship, social theory and post-theory - is presented. Diplomatic History and International Public Law were the two principal sources of the first generation of IR scholarship, supplemented by geopolitics, strategic studies, war studies and area studies. Since Raymond Aron's work and his influence on the second generation of French IR, the quest for a social theory of international relations has become the most characteristic feature of the French IR community. Moreover, the sociology of international relations can be seen as the specifically French answer to the Anglo-American quest for general theory, developed in new veins by the third generation's contribution to the post-theory of international relations. Thus, after two generations of self-chosen isolation, French IR is finally beginning to become connected to the international debate, although it remains to be seen whether this translates into a new theoretical takeoff. Francoska znanstvena disciplina o mednarodnih odnosih je dolgo časa obstajala na obrobju anglo-ameriškega mainstreama. Večino njenih prispevkov je le stežka mogoče povezati s teoretskimi razpravami, ki so in še vzbujajo zanimanje med proučevalci mednarodnih odnosov drugod po svetu. Avtor podrobneje predstavi in analizira tri generacije francoske teorije mednarodnih odnosov: generacije neteoretičnega proučevanja, družbene teorije in 'post-teorije'. Diplomatska zgodovina in mednarodno javno pravo sta bila poleg geopolitike, strateških študij, polemologije in področnih študij glavni izvor proučevanja mednarodnih odnosov v prvi generaciji. Zaradi dela Raymonda Arona in njegovega vpliva na drugo generacijo francoskega proučevanja mednarodnih odnosov je postalo prizadevanje za družbeno teorijo mednarodnih odnosov najbolj prepoznavna značilnost francoske znanstvene skupnosti. Še več, sociologijo mednarodnih odnosov je mogoče razumeti kot specifičen francoski odgovor na anglo-ameriško iskanje splošne teorije. Prispevek tretje generacije proučevanja k 'post-teoriji' mednarodnih odnosov jo je na nove načine le še dodatno razvil. Tako se je po dveh generacijah samoizbrane izolacije francosko proučevanje mednarodnih odnosov končno pričelo vključevati v mednarodno razpravo. Ostaja pa vprašljivo, če bo to vključevanje hkrati privedlo tudi do novega teoretičnega zagona.

This article moves from deconstruction to reconstruction in epistemology and research methodology. To begin with, we show why many social scientists are mistaken in their hope to obtain warranted knowledge in practical matters through standard social scientific methodologies. We do so by subjecting two versions of the belief in traditional epistemological projects to critical scrutiny. First, we discuss Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, which for centuries provided the most developed epistemological approach. Second, we critically reflect upon the “unity of science” position by showing how a series of more recent epistemological debates in mathematics and logic have ended in impasse. Having revisited Kant’s critical epistemology and other attempts to set knowledge on secure foundations, in section two we argue that the time has come for a pragmatic turn. In sections three and four we suggest that a coherent pragmatic approach consists of two elements: the recognition of knowledge generation as a social and discursive praxis, and the recognition that research should be oriented towards the generation of useful knowledge. We provide a number of concrete suggestions for abduction as a pragmatic research strategy, and we deflect predictable anxieties that our ideas imply an end to the scientific search for sound and solid knowledge.

International cooperation rests on state preferences with regard to the substantive scope, geographical range, and institutional depth of issue-specific devices to over-come collective action problems. Substantive broadening, geographical widening, and institutional deepening are the elixir of life of the European Union. As is familiar from international cooperation more in general, and not only from European integration, this rests upon a complex process of bargaining among states, each of which has its particular preferences. This paper explores two hypotheses about the relationship be-tween preferences on broadening, widening, and deepening. The first hypothesis as-sumes that the relationship is characterized by a virtuous cycle, while the second hy-pothesis assumes that there are tradeoffs rather than synergies. By looking at a sample of 24 distinct case studies from a specific policy field, namely international coopera-tion against drugs, the paper shows that, at least in this particular policy field, state preferences follow a synergetic pattern of broadening, widening, and deepening.