WALTZ AND MEARSHEIMER: DOES IT MAKE A DIFFERENCE? EXPLORING EPISTEMOLOGICAL AND META-THEORETICAL ELEMENTS OF THEORY

Paulo Victor Zaneratto Bittencourt

Todos os Trabalhos

Trabalho Completo

Resumo

Título do Trabalho

WALTZ AND MEARSHEIMER: DOES IT MAKE A DIFFERENCE? EXPLORING EPISTEMOLOGICAL AND META-THEORETICAL ELEMENTS OF THEORY

Autores

Paulo Victor Zaneratto Bittencourt

Modalidade

Trabalho avulso

Área temática

Teoria das Relações Internacionais

Data de Publicação

25/11/2022

País da Publicação

Brasil

Idioma da Publicação

Português

Página do Trabalho

https://www.even3.com.br/anais/spabri2022/505503-waltz-and-mearsheimer--does-it-make-a-difference-exploring-epistemological-and-meta-theoretical-elements-of-theo

ISBN

978-65-5941-910-4

Palavras-Chave

Epistemology, Meta-theory, Theory of International Relations, Offensive Realism, Defensive Realism

Resumo

The aim of this proposal is to advance an examination of the theoretical constructs of both Kenneth Waltz’s and John Mearsheimer’s, put in comparative perspective. It seems obvious for any International Relations Theory scholar that each of these authors is submitted to questions and interests of their times, and thus it seems evident that there are many differences between them. Furthermore, it also seems currently a commonplace to state the distinction made between Mearsheimer’s “offensive” realism, and Waltz’s “defensive” realism. On the other hand, there are also similarities between both authors that allow them to be read as realists in mainstream categorization of IR theories. For all these reasons, the paper I present provocatively addresses the differences between Mearsheimer and Waltz not through the mechanisms of their theoretical models, but rather through a meta-theoretical and epistemological exploration. Such effort is consonant with a research agenda proposed by Jackson (2011), who presents IR Theory as a discipline composed of different standards for producing scientific knowledge on the phenomena proposed for study. The first methodological presupposition of this study consists of considering each of these authors independently from theoretical categorizations or filiations one may attribute to them. This is the kind of methodological consideration Waever (2005) famously stated under the slogan “introducing persons instead of paradigms”. I address three questions to both Waltz’s (1979; 1986; 1996; 1997; 2001; 2003) and Mearsheimer’s (1994; 2014; 2018; 2019) works. First, I examine what are the existent conceptual elements in the theories under scrutiny. This is important for having a foreground of the theories presented. Second, I ask how these conceptual elements are held together, which is a different way to ask what the Methodology of the proposed theory is (Jackson, 2011). Put differently, with such a question I intend to comprehend how these conceptual elements are logically related to one another. Last, beyond knowing how these elements are logically juxtaposed, I ask how they describe reality, and what their stand towards reality is. In Jackson’s vocabulary, such a question would provide us with answers on each author’s “monism” or “dualism” regarding the world and its observer, or, in the way I operate such vocabulary, “reality” (“the world”) and theory (or the product made by “the observer”). In a first use of these questions, it is possible to address Waltz’s theory not under the “neopositivist” label as has been the dominant reading of his theory (Waever, 2009), but rather as an analyticist (Jackson, 2011), or, at least, an author who abstracts reality and is not concerned with describing it accurately, but usefully (Bittencourt, 2018). As for Mearsheimer’s work, first evidence derived mostly from his latest theoretical writing (Mearsheimer, 2018) points to a different direction of his works. By describing the difference between normative and explanatory theories, Mearsheimer draws the latter as descriptions of how the world really is, and, thus, seems to filiate himself to epistemological and meta-theoretical references that establish a split between reality and theory, and, thus, the former could be directly accessed, measured and, last, accurately described. This is, I argue, a different nature of theory from that proposed and used by Waltz, and it points, once again, to the question in the title of this paper: does it make any difference to produce knowledge departing from Waltz’s theory or from Mearsheimer’s theory? Unsurprisingly, this paper points to the affirmative direction; but it does so by threading a different path from mainstream theoretical explanations.

Título do Evento: Seminário de Pós-Graduação da Associação Brasileira de Relações Internacionais
Cidade do Evento: São Paulo
Título dos Anais do Evento: Anais do Seminário de Graduação e Pós-graduação em Relações Internacionais
Nome da Editora: Even3
Meio de Divulgação: Meio Digital

Como citar

BITTENCOURT, Paulo Victor Zaneratto. WALTZ AND MEARSHEIMER: DOES IT MAKE A DIFFERENCE? EXPLORING EPISTEMOLOGICAL AND META-THEORETICAL ELEMENTS OF THEORY.. In: Anais do Seminário de Graduação e Pós-graduação em Relações Internacionais. Anais...São Paulo(SP) IRI-USP, 2022. Disponível em: https//www.even3.com.br/anais/spabri2022/505503-WALTZ-AND-MEARSHEIMER--DOES-IT-MAKE-A-DIFFERENCE-EXPLORING-EPISTEMOLOGICAL-AND-META-THEORETICAL-ELEMENTS-OF-THEO. Acesso em: 14/05/2025