The European Journal of International Relations-Duck of Minerva symposium on “The End of International Relations Theory?” has concluded.
This is an informational post that will remain at the top of the page for the duration of the event.
The symposium runs 7 September-18 September. It features twenty-five planned posts consisting mostly of teasers of articles in the special issues and responses to those articles. Each teaser appears at 9.15am Eastern. The response to the article at 10.00am Eastern.
You can view all of the available entries in the symposium — in reverse chronological order — via the “EJIR Special Issue Symposium” tag. The schedule (below) also has links.
SAGE has ungated the special issue through early October, which means that you can download every article for free.
We encourage readers to take a look at the articles and join the conversation.
2. “Leaving theory behind: Why simplistic hypothesis testing is bad for International Relations.” John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt. Response: Dan Reiter. 7 September 2013.
3. “The mother of all isms: Causal mechanisms and structured
pluralism in International Relations theory.” Andrew Bennett. Response: Stacie E. Goddard. 8 September 2013.
5. “Constructivism or the eternal return of universals in International Relations.” Charlotte Epstein.Response: Vivienne Jabri. 10 September 2013.
6. “The ends of International Relations theory: Stages of reflexivity and modes of theorizing.” Stefano Guzzini. Response: Cameron Thies. 11 September 2013.
7. “International theory in a post-paradigmatic era: From substantive wagers to scientific ontologies.”Patrick Thaddeus Jackson and Daniel Nexon. Response: Janice Bially Mattern. 12 September 2013.
8. “Theory is dead, long live theory: The end of the Great Debates and the rise of eclecticism in International Relations.” David A. Lake. Response: Phil Arena. 13 September 2013.
10. “Experiencing the end and afterlives of International Relations/theory.” Christine Sylvester. Response: Lauren Wilcox. 15 September 2013.
11. “Core, periphery and (neo)imperialist International Relations.” Arlene B. Tickner. Response: Naeem Inayatullah. 16 September 2013.
12. “In the beginning: The International Relations enlightenment and the ends of International Relations theory.” Michael C. Williams. Response: Daniel Levine. 17 September 2013.
13. Response to the Special Issue. Felix Berenskoetter. 18 September 2013.