SavedAdd your journal

Journals / All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace / 2018 / Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 2

Would 100 Global Workshops on Theory Building Make A Difference?

Knud Erik JORGENSEN
Pages
65–80
Publication Date
2018-06-13
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The paper rests on the assumption that theoretical knowledge is valuable.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The paper rests on the assumption that theoretical knowledge is valuable.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The paper rests on the assumption that theoretical knowledge is valuable.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The paper rests on the assumption that theoretical knowledge is valuable.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Theory · theory building · hegemony

Abstract

The paper rests on the assumption that theoretical knowledge is valuable.

🔖

Cite This Article

JORGENSEN, K. E. (2018). Would 100 Global Workshops on Theory Building Make A Difference?. All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace, Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 2, 65–80. https://ajindex.com/articles/119789

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Alejando, Audrey. “Eurocentrism, Ethnocentrism, and Misery of Position: International Relations in Europe - A problematic oversight.” European Review of International Studies 4, no. 1 (forthcoming 2017).
  2. Alejando, Audrey, Knud Erik Jørgensen, Alexander Reichwein, Felix Rösch, and Helen Turton. Reappraising European IR Theoretical Traditions. London: Palgrave, forthcoming 2017.
  3. Behr, E. Hartmut. “The European Union in the Legacies of Imperial Rule? EU Accession Politics Viewed From A Historical Comparative Perspective.” European Journal of International Relations 13, no. 2 (2007): 239-62.
  4. Bilgin, Pinar. “How to Remedy Eurocentrism in IR? A Complement and a Challenge for the Global Transformation.” International Theory 8, no. 3 (2016): 492–501.
  5. Brown, Chris. Practical Judgement in International Political Theory: Selected Essays. Abingdon: Routledge, 2010.
  6. Callahan, William A. "China and the Globalisation of IR Theory: Discussion of 'Building International Relations Theory with Chinese Characteristics'.” Journal of Contemporary China 10, no. 26 (2001): 75-88.
  7. Carr, E. H. The Twenty Years' Crisis, 1919-1939: An Introduction to the Study of International Relations. London: Palgrave, 1946.
  8. Chacko, Priya. Indian Foreign Policy: The Politics of Postcolonial Identity from 1947 to 2004. Oxon: Routledge, 2013.
  9. Czaputowicz, Jacek, and Anna Wojciuk. The Study of International Relations in Poland. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, forthcoming 2017.
  10. Dugin, Alexander. “Theory Talk #66: Alexander Dugin on Eurasianism, the Geopolitics of Land and Sea, and a Russian Theory of Multipolarity.” By M. Millerman. Theory Talks, December 7, 2014. Accessed August 2, 2016. http://www.theory-talks.org/2014/12/theory-talk-66.html.
  11. Guzzini, Stefano. The Return of Geopolitics in Europe? Social Mechanisms and Foreign Policy Identity Crises. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2012.
  12. Hobson, John M. The Eurocentric Conception of World Politics: Western International Theory, 1760-2010. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.
  13. Hopf, Ted. Social Construction of International Politics: Identities and Foreign Policies, Moscow, 1955 and 1999. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2002.
  14. Holsti, K.J. “Exceptionalism in American Foreign Policy: Is It Exceptional?” European Journal of International Relations 17, no. 3 (2010): 381-404.
  15. Hutchings, Kimberly. “Kimberly Hutchings on Quiet as a Research Strategy, the Essence of Critique, and the Narcissism of Minor Differences.” By A.S. Bang Lindegaar