CIAO DATE: 07/02
"Power" in International Relations: concept formation between conceptual analysis and conceptual history
Stefano Guzzini
Copenhagen Peace Research Institute
March 2002
Abstract
This paper will try to take the reader on a journey from conceptual analysis, used as a means for variable construction, to concept formation as conceptual history through a series of stops which will add different contextual layers to the analysis. This step by step introduction is meant to show the basic connectedness, and indeed crucial importance, of all this layers for constructivism-inspired scholarship where concept formation is not simply a means but an important end in our knowledge. Throughout the journey, references will be made to the concept of power which, in this indirect way ' so I hope ' will be shown as variable, as core concept in a social theory, as well as a performative speech act, embedded in a certain historical and cultural context, with the effect of "politicising" issues.
In principle, conceptual analyses in IR have to start with an apolo getic note that their endeavour, although being also semantic - is not only so (see the start of many of Baldwin's articles collected in Baldwin 1989). Strictly 'scholarly' speaking, this is not warranted. But some clarity on the purposes of conceptual analysis might help.
Concepts are crucial in two w ays: they are both means and also an end of scholarly endeavour. On the one hand, concepts are necessary for understanding. As Kant put it: categories are the condition for the possibility of knowledge. Seen in this w ay, science is intersubjectively controlled understanding made possible through concepts. Such a control usually comes in the form of checking the internal logic of existing explanations or interpretations and of comparing different ones. The internal check is o nly possible with a clear lang uage. The comparison is even more demanding: to allow hence for an intersubjective control, however, scholars need to reflect on the very way these concepts are formed on the basis of which the interpretations/explanations are made. Concepts and their formation are to be explained themselves. In other words, concepts are not only a means to understanding, their own understanding is an aim of scholarly endeavour. Although conceptual analysis geared to wards concept formation is hence in the core of making scholarly sense of th e world, and not ephemeral or purely semantic, it, in turn, can only be done through other concepts. Thus, looking at concept formation exposes the hermeneutic circle of all our understanding.
Then, how do we analyse concepts and their formation? W hat is usu ally packaged as "conceptual analysis" comes in three versions, if distinguished according to their main purpose. A first ap proach attempts at producing a language so clear, that nearly mathematics-like sentences become possible. Here, conceptual analysis serves the purpose to find as unambiguous core meanings as possible such as to allow best possible scientific statements, hypothesis formation and reproducible empirical analysis. H ere, concepts are mainly a means for explanation, a tool that needs to be continuously sharpened at the empirical front. A second approach already enlarges this picture by looking at the way how concepts are embedded in particular social theories. Here concept formation runs parallel to theory formation more generally, where theories are understood as frameworks of analysis. Finally, conceptual analysis, then called conceptual history can be carried out for the sake of b etter understanding history , including its present.
This paper will try to take the reader on a journey from conceptual analysis, used as a means for variable construction to concept formation as conceptual history through a series of stops which will add different contextual layers to the analysis. This step by step introduction is meant to show the basic connectedness, and indeed crucial importance, of all this layers for constructivism-inspired scholarship where concept formation is not simply a means but an important end in our knowledge. Throughout the journey, references will be made to the concept of power which, in this indirect way - so I hope - will be shown as variable, as core concept in a social theory, as well as a performative speech act, embedded in a certain historical and cultural context, with the effect of 'politicising' issues.