La teoría de las relaciones internacionales en la encrucijada: entre el tercer y el cuarto debate

Rafael Calduch Cervera

doi:10.14422/cir.i16.y2019.002

Authors

Rafael Calduch Cervera Universidad Complutense de Madrid https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7550-986X

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14422/cir.i16.y2019.002

Keywords:

international relations, theoretical debates, scientific program, constructivism, sociological internationalism

Abstract

The third theoretical debate in international relations among the positivists, especially the neo-realists, and the critical post-positivist authors, tried to be overcome by constructivism. However, in this debate the contributions of the scientific program and sociological internationalism were ignored, which have demonstrated a greater methodological rigor and an explanatory breadth of the dominant themes in international society. For this reason, the need arises to open the fourth debate to ensure that this science continues to be progressive, thus avoiding the risk of its irrelevance in the long term.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Rafael Calduch Cervera, Universidad Complutense de Madrid

Catedrático de Derecho Internacional Público y Relaciones Internacionales

References

Adler, E. (1997). Seizing the Middle Ground: Constructivism in World Politics. European Journal of International Relations, 3(3), 319-363. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066197003003003

Álvarez, G. (2015). Foreign Policy Analysis: A constructivist and critical approach. Estudios Internacionales, (180), 47-65.

Arenal, C. del. (2014). Etnocentrismo y Teoría de las Relaciones Internacionales: una visión crítica. Madrid: Tecnos.

Aron, R. (1963). Paz y guerra entre las naciones. Madrid: Revista de Occidente.

Aron, R. (1967). Qu’est-ce qu’une théorie des Relations Internationales. Revue Française de Science Politique, 17, 837-861. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3406/rfsp.1967.393043

Arriola, J. (2013). El constructivismo: su revolución onto-epistemológica en Relaciones Internacionales. Revista Opinião Filosófica, (1), 377-396. DOI: https://doi.org/10.6018/202481

Axelrod, R. (1986). La evolución de la cooperación. El dilema del prisionero y la teoría de juegos. Madrid: Alianza.

Axelrod, R. (2004). La complejidad de la cooperación: modelos de cooperación y colaboración basados en los agentes (2.ª ed.). México: Fondo de Cultura Económica.

Azar, E. E. (2018). Conflict and Peace Data Bank (COPDAB), 1948-1978. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]. DOI: http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR07767.v4

Baran, P. (1959). La economía política del crecimiento. México: Fondo de Cultura Económica.

Bertalanffy, L. von. (2006). Teoría General de los sistemas. Fundamentos, desarrollo, aplicaciones. México, Fondo de Cultura Económica.

Biersteker, T. J. (1989). Critical Reflections on Post-Positivism in International Relations. International Studies Quarterly, 33, 263-267. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2600459

Bohórquez, J. C., Gourley, S., Dizon, A. R., Spagat, M., & Johnson, F. (2009). Common Ecology Quantifies Human Insurgency. Nature, 462, 911-914. Supplementary Information: 1-17. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08631

Boulding, K. E. (1959). National Images and International Systems. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 3(2), 120-131.

Boulding, K. E. (1962). Conflict and Defense: A General Theory. New York: Harper & Brothers.

Boulding, K. E. (1975). International Systems: Peace, Conflict Resolution, and Politics. Colorado: Associated University Press.

Bremer, S. S. (1992). Dangerous Dyads.Conditions affecting the Likelhood of Interstate War, 1816-1965. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 36(2), 309-341. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0022002792036002005

Bremer, S. A., Regan, P. M., & Clark, D. H. (2003). Building a Science of World Politics. Emerging Methodologies and the Study of Conflict. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 47(1), 3-12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0022002702239508

Calduch, R. (2007). Conflictos internacionales culturales y violencia terrorista. Cursos de Derecho Internacional y Relaciones Internacionales de Vitoria-Gasteiz 2006. Bilbao: Servicio Editorial de la Universidad del País Vasco.

Calduch, R. (2013). La Escuela Española de Relaciones Internacionales. Revista de Relaciones Internacionales de la UNAM, (115), 9-32.

Cardoso, F. H., & Faletto, E. (1969). Dependencia y desarrollo en América Latina: ensayo de interpretación sociológica (1.ª ed.). México: Siglo XXI.

Chiozza, G. (2002). Is There a Class of Civilization? Evidence from Patterns of International Conflict Involvement, 1946-1997. Journal of Peace Research, 39(6), 711-734. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343302039006004

Cioffi-Revilla, C. A. (1981). Fuzzy Sets and Models of International Relations. American Journal of Political Sciences, 25(1), 129-159. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2110917

Deutsch, K. W., & Singer, J. D. (1964). Multipolar Power Systems and International Stability. World Politics, 16(3), 390-406. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2009578

Doty, R. L. (1997). Aporia: A Critical Exploration of the Agent-Structure Problematique in International Relations Theory. European journal of International Relations, 3(3), 365-392. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2009578

Dunne, T. (1995). The Social Construction of International Society. European journal of International Relations, 1(3), 367-389.

Duroselle, J. B. (1952). L’étude des Relations Internationales: Objet, Méthode, Perspectives. Revue Française de Science Politique, 2, 676-701. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3406/rfsp.1952.392166

Duroselle, J. B. (1998). Todo imperio perecerá. Teoría sobre las relaciones internacionales. México: Fondo de Cultura Económica.

Farkas, A. (1996). The Evolutionary Models in Foreign Policy Analysis. International Studies Quarterly, (40), 343-361.

Furtado, C. (1969). La economía latinoamericana desde la conquista ibérica hasta la revolución cubana. México: Siglo XXI.

Gibson, Q. (1961). La lógica de la investigación social. Madrid: Tecnos.

Gurr, T. R., & Harff, B. (1994). Ethnic Conflict in World Politics. Boulder: Westview Press.

Gurr, T. R. (1980). Handbook of political conflict: Theory and research. New York: The free press.

Heisenberg, W. (2013). La imagen de la naturaleza en la física actual. Recuperado de http://mimosa.pntic.mec.es/~sferna18/EJERCICIOS/2013-14/La_imagen_de_la_naturaleza_en_la_fisica_actual-Werner_Heisenberg.pdf

Henderson, E. A., & Tucker, R. (2001). Clear and Present Strangers: The Clash of Civilizations and International Conflict. International Studies Quarterly, (45), 317-338.

Holzscheiter, A. (2014). Between Communicative Interaction and Structures of Signification: Discourse Theory and Analysis in International Relations. International Studies Perspectives, (15), 142-162.

Kaplan, M. A. (1957). System and Process in International Politics. Nueva York: John Wiley and sons.

Kaplan, M. A. (1961). Problems of Theory Building and Theory Confirmation in International Politics. World Politics, 14(1), 6-24.

Kaplan, M. A. (1966). Traditionalism vs Science in International Relations. World Politics, 19(1), 1-20.

Knorr, K. & Verba, S. (eds.) (1961). The International System. Theoretical Essays. Princenton University Press.

Kuhn, T. S. (1971). La estructura de las revoluciones científicas (6.ª ed.). México: Fondo de Cultura Económica.

Lakatos, I. (1985). La Historia de la ciencia y sus reconstrucciones racionales. En I. Hacking (ed.), Revoluciones científicas. México: Fondo de Cultura Económica.

Landheer, B. (1957). Les théories de la sociologie contemporaine et le Droit International. Recueil des Cours de l’Academie de Droit International de La Haye, 92(II), 525-621.

Lapid, Y. (1989). The Third Debate: On the Prospects of International Theory in a Post-Positivis Era. International Studies Quarterly, 33(3), 235-254. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2600457

Lenin, V. I. (1975). Obras Escogidas. (Vols. 1-3). Madrid: Akal.

Marshall, M. G., & Marshall, G. E. (2018). Global Report 2017: Conflict, Governance and State Fragility. Viena: Center for Systemic Peace. Recuperado el 19 de Agosto de 2018 de http://www.systemicpeace.org/vlibrary/GlobalReport2017.pdf

Marx, C., & Engels, F. (1976). Obras Escogidas. (Vols. 1-3). Moscú: Progreso.

McClelland, Ch. A. (1955). Apllications of General Systems Theory in International Relations. Main Currents in Modern Thought, 12, 27-34.

Merle, M. (1991). Sociología de las relaciones internacionales (2.ª ed.). Madrid: Alianza.

Mitchell, C. R. (1992). Relationships within World Society. In E. Luard (ed.), Basic Texts in International Relations. The Evolution of Ideas about International Society (pp. 566-567). Londres: MacMillan Press.

Modelski, G. (1960). The Communist International System. Princeton, Princeton University Press.

Morgenstern, O., & Neumann, J. von (1944). Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton University Press.

Nash, J. (1950). Equilibrium points in n-person games. Proceedings of the National Academy of the USA, 36(1), 48-49.

Onuf, N. (1989). Anarchy, Authority, Rule. International Studies Quarterly, 33(2), 149-173.

Onuf, N. (1989). World of Our Making: Rules and Rule in Social Theory and International Relations. Greenwood, Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.

Onuf, N. (1995). Levels. European Journal of International Relations, 1(1), 35-58.

Onuf, N. (1998). Constructivism: A User’s Manual. In V. Kubálková, N. Onuf, P. Kowert (eds.), International Relations in a Constructed World (pp. 58-77). New York, M. E.: Sharpe Armonk.

Parsons, T. (1962). La polarización y el problema del orden internacional. Revista de Política Internacional, (61), 13-40.

Parsons, T. (1966). El sistema social. Madrid: Revista de Occidente.

Popper, K. R. (1959). La lógica de la investigación científica (1.ª ed., 5.ª reimp.). Madrid: Tecnos.

Price, R., & Reus-Smit, Ch. (1998). Dangereous Liaisons? Critical International Theory and Constructivism. European Journal of International Relations, 4(3), 259-294. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1354066198004003001

Putnam, H. (1985). La corroboración de las teorías. En I. Hacking (ed.), Revoluciones científicas. México: Fondo de Cultura Económica.

Rapoport, A. (1957). Lewis F. Richardson’s mathematical theory of war. Conflict Resolution, 1(3), 249-299. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177%2F002200275700100301

Rapoport, A. (1960). Fights, Games, and Debates. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Rapoport, A. (1980). The Origins of Violence: Approaches to the Study of Conflict. New York: Paragon House.

Richardson, L. F. (1948). Variation of the Frequency of Fatal Quarrels with Magnitude. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 43(244), 523-546. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1948.10483278

Richardson, L. F.- (1960). Arms and Insecurity: A Mathematical Study of the Causes and Origins of War. Edited by Nicolas Rashevsky and Ernesto Trucco. Pittsburgh, Pa.: The Boxwood Press.

Richardson, L. F. (1960). Statistics of Deadly Quarrels. Edited by Quincy Wright and C. C. Lienau. Pittsburgh, Pa.: The Boxwood Press.

Ruyssen, Th. (1939). Les caractères sociologiques de la communauté humaine. Recueil des Cours de l’Academie de Droit International de La Haye, 67(I), 125-231. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789028610422.121-232

Sánchez, L. E. (2012). ¿De qué se habla cuando se habla de constructivismo? Revisión de sus clasificaciones y categorías. Revista de Relaciones Internacionales de la UNAM, (114), 107-129.

Schindler, D. (1933). Contribution à l’étude des facteurs sociologiques et psicologiques du droit international. Recueil des Cours de l’Academie de Droit International de La Haye, 46(IV), 233-325.

Schrodt, Ph. A. (2004). Patterns, Rules and Learning: Computational Models of International Behavior (2.ª ed.). Vinland: Parus Analytical Systems.

Schwarzenberger, G. (1960). La política del poder. Estudios de la sociedad internacional. México/Buenos Aires: Fondo de Cultura Económica.

Singer, J. D., & Small, M. (1966). Formal Alliances, 1815-1939. Journal of Peace Research, 3(1), 1-32.

Singer, J. D., & Small, M. (1969). Formal Alliances, 1815-1965. An Extension of the Basic Data. Journal of Peace Research, 6(3), 257-282. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177%2F002234336900600305

Singer, J. D. (1981). Accounting for International War: The State of the Discipline. Journal of Peace Research, XVIII(1), 1-18.

Taber, Ch. S. (1992). POLI: An Expert System Model of U.S. Foreign Policy Belief System. The American Political Science Review, 86(4), 888-904. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1964342

Truyol, A. (1993). La sociedad internacional (2.ª ed.). Madrid: Alianza.

Valle, S. (2008). Cultura y civilización: un acercamiento desde las ciencias sociales. Madrid: Biblioteca Nueva.

Waltz, K. N. (1988). Teoría de la política internacional. Buenos Aires: Grupo Editor Latinoamericano.

Weldes, J. (1996). Constructing National Interests. European Journal of International Relations, 2(3), 275-318. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1354066196002003001

Wendt, A. (1987). The Agent-Structure Problem in International Relations Theory. International Organization, 41(3), 335-370. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S002081830002751X

Wendt, A. (1992). Anarchy is what States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics. International Organization, 46(2), 391-425. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300027764

Wendt, A. (1994). Collective Identity Formation and the International State. The American Political Science Review, 88(2), 384-396. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2944711

Wendt, A. (1998). On constitution and causation in International Relations. Review of International Studies, 24(5), 101-118.

Wendt, A. (1999). Social Theory of International Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Wendt, A. (2001). Driving with Rearview Mirror: On the Rational Science of Institutional Design. International Organization, 55(4), 1019-1049. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/002081801317193682

Wendt, A. (2003). Why a World State is inevitable. European Journal of International Relations, 9(4), 491-542. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177%2F135406610394001

Wright, Q. (1942). A Study of War. (Vols. 1-2). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.