Global IR through dialogue.
This article aims to address how to ensure a two-way 'dialogue' across 'the West/non-West distinction' in international studies. To this end, I first discuss three different approaches to dialogue, the Socratic, the Habermasian, and the Weberian, and clarify what kind of thing dialogue should be if...
| Publicado en: | Pacific Review Vol. 32; no. 2; pp. 131 - 150 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Taylor & Francis Ltd
Mar2019
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=135889858&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 135889858 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 09512748 5C0 jtl: Pacific Review issn: 09512748 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Mar2019 vid: 32 iid: 2 pid: 377 pub: Taylor & Francis Ltd artinfo: ui: 135889858 10.1080/09512748.2018.1461680 ppf: 131 ppct: 19 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P size: 1.2MB tig: atl: Global IR through dialogue. aug: au: Yong-Soo, Eun affil: Department of Political Science and International Studies, Hanyang University, Seoul, South Korea su: Dialogue Foreign study Questioning Instrumentalists Learning Theory of knowledge sug: subj: Dialogue Foreign study Questioning Instrumentalists Learning Theory of knowledge keyword: 'instrumentalist' approach 'superior' identity complementary reciprocity constructivism dialogue East Asia Global IR mutual learning West-non-West divide ab: This article aims to address how to ensure a two-way 'dialogue' across 'the West/non-West distinction' in international studies. To this end, I first discuss three different approaches to dialogue, the Socratic, the Habermasian, and the Weberian, and clarify what kind of thing dialogue should be if it is to overcome the 'West-non-West divide' and transform the current 'Western-centric' IR into a global discipline. I argue that dialogue should be understood as reciprocal feedback from different perspectives for mutual learning. In order to achieve this goal (i.e. mutual learning), I call for an 'instrumentalist' approach to dialogue. To elucidate this point, I offer an empirical illustration. The focus here is on dialogue as mutual learning between Western-centric IR theory, more specifically constructivism, and the indigenous experience and knowledge of East Asia. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Copyright of Pacific Review is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. item: Pacific Review holder: Taylor & Francis Ltd dt: @attributes: year: 2019 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|