Lecture 2, Machiavelli. As before, best results in iTunes and QuickTime Player 7.
Podcast lecture 1 for SIS-301, Spring 2012. Topic: Thucydides. Note that this enhanced AAC file (.m4a) has both slide images and a voice track; in my experience it plays best in QuickTime Player 7 or in iTunes. QuickTime Player 10 and other media players sometimes fail to show the slides.
ISA-Northeast 2011, a panel entitled “Systems, Process, and International Relations.” My comments as discussant.
Sermon delivered at the Montreal International Studies Association meeting, 18 March 2011. Lower audio quality than usual because I recorded this straight to my iPad instead of recording it to another digital voice recorder.
Also, public mea culpa to Hans-Martin Jaeger, who didn’t actually say that feminism wasn’t a constructivism, but did say that he was not going to discuss feminism in his presentation.
I didn’t want to just do a straight-up book talk on the Conduct of Inquiry book at the ISA-Northeast conference, so we did something a little different: Dan Green gave an overview of the book’s argument, I said a few things about my aims and intentions, and then we had a lot of q&a time. I think the result is a pretty good articulation of some my hopes for the book and for the field of IR.
Discussant comments made during the book launch and discussion for Barry Buzan and Amitav Acharya’s edited book Non-Western International Relations Theory, American University, 3 May 2010. Both editors made remarks before my comments, but as usual I didn’t record those since I didn’t have their permission to do so.
The final lecturelet for SIS-301; this one’s about Naeem Inayatullah and David Blaney’s book International Relations and the Problem of Difference.
Naeem and David actually have spoken about their approach at a workshop I organized, and a recording of those remarks is available here.
Almost the end of the series! Here’s lecturelet 12, which is somewhat about feminism and somewhat about the broader critical-theoretical tradition that it is part of, at least or especially in IR.
My subjective perception was that I talked a bit fast on a couple of these slides. Fortunately, QuickTime has options that you can use to slow down playback, if that’s necessary.
Based on some class and post-class comments, I decided to whip up a quick supplemental lecturelet on motivational versus intentional explanations. This kind of issue always comes up when one starts delving into constructivist theory, but I don’t think that the explanation I gave in class was sufficient . . . so here’s another attempt.
Still hovering around 50 minutes. Here’s the eleventh installment in the series; this lecture(let) focuses on realist constructivism, and extends/complements last week’s thoughts on liberal constructivism.
One clarification: the “social construction” / “not social construction” fractal is not a replacement for the 2×2 that arranges realism, liberalism, liberal constructivism, and realist constructivism as ideal-typical combinations of commitments; that said, the fractal might be the analytical engine driving the debates. You decide.