International Relations and the Challenge of Postmodernism (e-bog) af Jarvis, D. S. L.
Jarvis, D. S. L. (forfatter)

International Relations and the Challenge of Postmodernism e-bog

302,96 DKK (inkl. moms 378,70 DKK)
Assesses current poststructural and postmodern theories and defends international relations as a disciplinePromising to stimulate discussion among both those who celebrate the arrival of the &quote;Third Debate&quote; and those who fear its colonialization and spread, D. S. L. Jarvis offers an innovative appraisal of the various postmodern and poststructural theories sweeping the discipline of ...
E-bog 302,96 DKK
Forfattere Jarvis, D. S. L. (forfatter)
Udgivet 24 november 2021
Længde 296 sider
Genrer International relations
Sprog English
Format epub
Beskyttelse LCP
ISBN 9781643362892
Assesses current poststructural and postmodern theories and defends international relations as a disciplinePromising to stimulate discussion among both those who celebrate the arrival of the "e;Third Debate"e; and those who fear its colonialization and spread, D. S. L. Jarvis offers an innovative appraisal of the various postmodern and poststructural theories sweeping the discipline of international relations. Citing the work of Richard Ashley, Jarvis explores the lineage of postmodern theory, its importation into international relations, and its transformation from critical epistemology to subversive and deconstructive political program.Inspired by a deep-seated concern that theory in international relations is becoming increasingly abstract and unrelated to the subject matter scholars strive to understand, Jarvis argues that much postmodern and poststructuraltheory has impoverished our theoretical understanding of global political relations, embroilling us in incommensurate discourses and research agendas driven by identity politics.By developing a series of critical typologies to assess postmodern and poststructural theories, Jarvis mount a ringing defense of the discipline's exisiting research methods and epistemologies, and he suggests that more harm than good has come of the epistemological subversion occasioned by the Third Debate.