Maya Zehfuss Sparknotes

Another example of this is his identification of “introspective orientation” (Merleau-Ponty 1962, vii), which was a continuation of his dramatic emphasis on the all-pervasive, reciprocal dependence of all aspects of the embodied subject and the world in the context of accumulated perceptions (Crowther 2012, 104). Through a period of reflection and introspection, previously perceived phenomena and their aspects are recontextualised (Crowther 2012, 104), contributing to the individual’s corporeal imagination (Crowther 2009, 70) and their development of forms of apperception (Merleau-Ponty 1945, 3). Crowther (2012, 103) argues that this was the central tenet of Merleau-Ponty’s phenomenology; that our most fundamental perception and knowledge of the world arises through the body’s operations as a unified sensory-motor field. This is what Merleau-Ponty (Crowther 2009, 74) termed “brute meaning”, a form of chiasmic intertwining that was more than just a primitive view, but a true, all-encompassing “direct and primitive contact with the world, and (subsequently) endowing that contact with a philosophical status”, and this tenet will be applied across this

Post-Modernsism is a very important and essential theory that has been brought about to the study of international relations. It falls under the category of post-positivism, which is a rejection of positivism in the sense that it dismisses the notion that international relations can be observed in an objective manner. Other theories encompassed in the post-positivism umbrella include constructivism, neo-marxism, critical theory, feminism, and post-colonialism (Burchill 2013). Post-Modernism also brought about new perspectives to international relations, these include: arbitrary nature of modernity, choice posing as truth, reality as a social construction, the rejection of positivism, the crisis of modernity, loss of confidence in the authority of the grand narratives, its relation to language, and the process of identity construction. Also, notably, Post-Modernism may receive criticism from constructivism and realism, but ultimately arguments for Post-Modernism will make more logical sense within the international relations arena. Lastly, Post-Modernism is essential because of it’s unique views in ideas such as language, abstract views, etc., to better understand political activity within the international relations community.

Maya Angelou is a phenomenal woman. She rises through all things that come her way and she refuses to back down. Angelou chose at a very young age to be a writer and a role model for many people. She believes that everyone should be treated equally and that the world should come together as a unity. Angelou had many careers but is known mostly for her poetic creations. She has come a long way from where she started and I think anyone can agree with me when I say, she has made us all proud with her accomplishments. Angelou writes poetry to inform and encourage others to carry on through the worst of times. She is a strong, confident, inspirational woman and I am more than honored to be doing my senior paper on her.

The discipline of international relations (IR) is one that has witnessed a multitude of variations and shifts. It has produced a fair amount of debate between academics within the international relations scholarship. Due to a plethora of circumstances scholars have subjected the traditional rationalist theories of neorealism and neoliberalism to critical re-evaluations. As a result, constructivism is a concept that has emerged as an alternative approach to dominant IR theories. It focuses on the importance of state identities in defining and gaining knowledge of state interests, actions and goals. There are theorists who purport that the rise of constructivism allows for a further understanding of another international theory, feminism.

“Maya Penn” A Little Package Making a Big Difference in a National and Global World

As constructivists are prone to, Applebaum is aware of the differences in definitions of abstract words depending on one’s culture or one’s childhood. Often times, these definitions are derived from an understanding developed through one’s internal understanding as well as by absorbing information from external sources such as parents, cultures, friends and the news. In order to demonstrate differences in definitions, Applebaum addresses abstract terms by categorizing them “in Turkish terms” or by quoting broadly defined words such as “enemies” and “interests” to cause readers to pause and think about why she quoted singular words in the first place.To illustrate the Constructivist’s social theory, Applebaum agrees that social norms and human behavior dictates actions taken for the state. Turkey and Russia were “nearly at war with one

International relation is a process that states try to serve their national interests, which may be in conflicts with those of other nations, in an anarchic international structure, by means of their policies and actions. Basing on this consideration, the nature of international relations could be summarized as three key features: anarchy, power and national behavior or policies, which almost every theories or approach had concerned with. This essay will basically make comparison on how does each theory apply to these key features and why the combination of realism and constructivism, or realist constructivism is the most relevant and effective one.

Dan Stone has concerns regarding what he perceives as the ‘ethnocentrism’ that is contained within Arendt’s humanistic approach. Stone is of the opinion that this leaves Arendt ‘apparently less moved by the

Constructivists believe that people are “active agents” whose ideas and experiences shape and construct the world around them. Much conflict exists between Israel and Palestine because they view each other radically differently, largely due to a religious divide. Constructivism suggests that nations with similar values, ideas, and norms are less likely to experience conflict with one another, therefore insinuating that nations with opposing values, ideas, and norms are more conflict-prone, such as Israel and Palestine. Because of these differences, it is challenging for the Israelis to view the Palestinians as human beings, and vice versa. It is the reason why Israel felt no remorse in killing 1,462 Palestinian civilians between July 8th and August 27th of 2014 during Operation Protective Edge. Wendt’s paradigm of constructivism does not contradict realism, rather, it contributes to it. Wendt introduces “Constructing International Politics” by expressing that constructivists share many realist views. He merely aims to create a paradigm that could further explain international politics without erasing prior paradigms such as

Wendt makes another exemplary point to further explain why identities are a crucial role to understanding anarchy, “The absence or failure of roles makes defining situations and interests more difficult, and identity confusion may result” (74). Under a state of anarchy, not knowing a state’s identity is extremely dangerous. Misinterpretation of actions because of identity confusion could lead to serious consequences and in extreme cases, war.

Neo-realism, also known as structural realism or system level theory outlined in Theory of International Politics (1979) has been Kenneth Waltz’s response to the Realism theory by Hans Morgenthau (1948). The neo realist thinking of Waltz along with John Mearsheimer, Robert Keohane, Stephen Krasner, Charles Kindleberger and Robert Tucker George Modelski had a deep impact both within and beyond the realist tradition. Unlike classical realism, Neo realism does not consider human nature as relevant when it comes to the behaviour of states in international system rather explains it in terms of structure of the international system. As per neo realists, the international structure is predominately defined by their ordering principles (anarchy) and the distribution of capabilities (power) across units. In the neo realist theory, power is simply the combined capability of a state and changes in the structures can be explained by the distribution of power across the states. Waltz claimed that any theory of international relations should be able to tell both about the units-states- and the system as a whole.

International politics as a subject involves disparate theories – each has a perception of their own – to propound their ideas. Theories can form an idealized vision: in the form of images. In short, images can act as a lens to elucidate international politics. Each one of them has their unique way to explain the happenings of international politics. In an abstract sense, each image has their own explanation – why international politics assume a certain form over another. This paper analyzes how different images discern international politics. The major images discussed involve – realism, liberalism, and constructivism. Realism, however, provides a near-perfect example in expounding international politics, despite some flaws.

Hans Morganthau’s realist approach to international politics was centred around the stuggle for power, to the extent that, if the study of international politics were not focused on the global power structure, we would instead be studying international law and justice, or international economics (Morgenthau, 1985). Simply put, “Politics defined as power is important and merits study in its own rights” (Barkin, 2003, p. 327). The concept of realism rose from the “need to study international politics as they are, not as we feel they should be” (Barkin, 2003, p. 327), that is, as put by Morgenthau, through an “empirical and pragmatic” approach (Morgenthau, 1985, p. 3). As will discussed in this essay, we have seen throughout history to current times, actors in international politics behaving in such a way to maximise their self-interest through the harvest of material power. Constructivism provides another lens in which power in the shape of ideas, culture, ideology or other socially constructed factors, can be realised through political discourse (Hopf, 1998).

Truth and realism are the obverse of the same coin and have a synchronistic relationship. The essence of what constitutes reality has become increasingly vague and obscure in the modern world. Secularists do not believe that there is any one reality “out there.” Artists and writers no longer see the world as Leo Tolstoy or Charles Dickens did, with a clear governing morality emanating from a Higher Power that had equal claim on people’s lives. Rather we are taught to see the world in terms of situational ethics, and vacillating shades of morality; we are told to “move with the times.” Without the qualifying and affirming influence of the Spirit the very concept of reality becomes an uncertain notion. Commenting on the increasingly vague and depreciating value of the concept “reality,” the Spanish philosopher José Ortega y Gasset once protested: “I cannot now discuss this involved term which I have been careful always to use in quotation marks to render it suspect.”

<br>The event which the essay documents is that of a definitive epistemological break with structuralist thought, of the