THE ANALYSIS OF ROBERT COX'S CRITICAL THEORY: THE INHERENT SUBJECTIVITY AND PURPOSEFUL NATURE OF THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15642/siyar.2024.4.1.33-44Keywords:
Critical Theory, Robert Cox, International Relations, Theoretical FrameworkAbstract
Robert Cox's assertion that “theory is always for someone and for and some purpose" is a fundamental tenet of political science and international relations, emphasizing the inherent subjective and purposeful nature of theoretical frameworks. This study critically examines Cox's contribution to International Relations (IR) through critical theory. This study is based on a qualitative research approach and uses an extensive literature review to gather relevant information, thorough analysis of existing journals and books, providing a comprehensive understanding of Cox's critical theory and its impact on the field of IR. The finding of this study highlights the need for continued evaluation of Cox popular IR theory and the application of Cox's theoretical foundations to deepen understanding of the world. Cox's critical theory brings new perspectives and contributes significantly to the diversity of theoretical frameworks in IR. This study highlights the transformative impact of Cox's critical approach and its relevance to shaping contemporary debates in the international relations.Downloads
References
Boote, D. N., & Beile, P. (2005). Scholars before researchers: On the centrality of the dissertation literature review in research preparation. Educational researcher, 34(6), 3- 15.
Bryant, R. L., & Bailey, S. (1997). Third world political ecology. Psychology Press.
Burchill, S. (2001) Theories of international relations, 2nd ed. Palgrave, Basingstoke.
Cardoso, F. H., & Faletto, E. (1979). Dependency and development in Latin America. Univ of California Press.
Cox, R. W. (1981) Social Forces, States and World Orders: Beyond International Relations Theory. Millennium 10 (2), 126–155.
Cox, R. W., & Sinclair, T. J. (1996). Approaches to world order.
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Mapping the field of mixed methods research. Journal of mixed methods research, 3(2), 95-108.
Deitelhoff, N. & Zürn, M. (2016) Lehrbuch der Internationalen Beziehungen: Per Anhalter durch die IB-Galaxis, Originalausgabe. C.H. Beck, Munich.
Doyle, M. W. (1986). Liberalism and world politics. American political science review, 80(4), 1151-1169.
Dunne, T., Kurki, M. & Smith, S. (eds.) (2013) International relations theories: Discipline and diversity, Third edition. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Drezner, D. W. (2015) Theories of international politics and zombies, Revived edition. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
Halliday, F. & Rosenberg, J. (1998) Interview with Ken Waltz. Review of International Studies 24 (3), 371–386.
Imbusch, P., & Zoll, R. (Eds.). (2006). Friedens-und Konfliktforschung: Eine Einführung. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
E-ISSN 2747- 233X
Jahn, B. (2016). The cultural construction of international relations: the invention of the state of nature. Springer.
John, B. (2016) Theorizing the Political Relevance of International Relations Theory. International Studies Quarterly, 1–14.
Keohane, R., & Nye Jr, J. S. (2001). Between centralization and fragmentation: The club model of multilateral cooperation and problems of democratic legitimacy. Available at SSRN 262175.
Kurki, M. & Wright, C. (2013) International Relations and Social Science. In: Dunne, T., Kurki, M. & Smith, S. (eds.) International relations theories: Discipline and diversity, Third edition. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 14–35.
Mearsheimer, J. J. (2001). The tragedy of great power politics. WW Norton & Company. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook.
sage.
Mills, C. W. ([1959] 2000) The sociological imagination. Oxford University Press, Oxford England, New York.
Mol, A. P., & Spaargaren, G. (2000). Ecological modernisation theory in debate: A review. Environmental politics, 9(1), 17-49.
Moolakkattu, J. S. (2011) Robert W. Cox and Critical Theory of International Relations. International Studies 46 (4), 439–456.
Smith, S. (2013) Introduction: Diversity and Disciplinarity in International Relations Theory. In: Dunne, T., Kurki, M. & Smith, S. (eds.) International relations theories: Discipline and diversity, Third edition. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 1–12.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Aizza Jundana
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
