What’s at stake in developing hermeneutical approaches to the practice turn in International Relations (IR)?

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 동아시아국제정치학회
· 수록지 정보 : 국제정치연구 / 27권 / 1호 / 161 ~ 192페이지
· 저자명 : 이원동

초록

This article aims to demonstrate that applying certain interpretivist insights and concepts, particularly the hermeneutic circle and social imaginaries, into the practice turn framework within International Relations (IR) can address three foundational challenges, including (a) the contextual understanding of practices and their evolution over time (b) the interpretation of practice meanings within theoretical frameworks, and (c) addressing the agent-structure dichotomy more effectively. Firstly, it critiques the practice theory’s frequent oversight of social background and historical contingencies, which are essential in shaping human understanding and practices. Secondly, it addresses the inadequacy in recognizing the role of collective narratives and the fact-value distinction's impact on research. Thirdly, it challenges the conventional restrictive view of agency, advocating for a more nuanced understanding of the agent-structure relationship. By drawing on examples such as Benedict Anderson's ‘imagined communities’ as one way to recast conceptual toolkit for anti-naturalist assumptions in IR, this study further underscores the contingent unfolding of international practices and poses a normative challenge to the conventional positivist-oriented probe into global affairs, bridging the gap between mechanistic appropriation of the practice turn in IR and more agency-based, humanistic interpretivist approaches. Ultimately, the article emphasizes the indispensability of interpretivist methodologies for a deeper, more nuanced analysis of emerging IR practices, offering a comprehensive critique and a forward-looking perspective on the hermeneutical rendering of practice turn. This investigation intends to serve as a preliminary theoretical attempt to blend interpretivist perspectives with the practice turn's applications within International Relations. It openly recognizes certain constraints, including a dearth of empirical substantiation and a marginal representation of non-Western viewpoints. Future research is positioned to tackle these limitations, thereby broadening the applicability of the practice turn across diverse geopolitical contexts — for instance, through examining the symbolic construction of Republic of Korea-United States relations in South Korea's post-colonial history. The interpretive framework developed in this study provides a comprehensive toolkit for researchers to critically evaluate mainstream International Relations (IR) approaches by highlighting previously neglected perspectives. These perspectives illuminate the inherent dynamics of international practices and offer analytical depth for addressing issues such as the impact of political peoplehood on collective identity formation amidst moral polarization among nations.

참고자료

· 없음