In this essay, we elucidate the insufficiency of a simple binary choice between substantialism and relationalism or between dualist and nondual/incarnational sensibilities. We highlight the ways that all translations of these sensibilities into the scholarly form of life encounter characteristic problems and challenges precisely because the very practice of scholarly writing is always and already inclined towards a more dualist way of going on.
AbbottA (2001) Chaos of Disciplines. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
2.
AyerA J (1952) Language, Truth and Logic. 2nd edition. New York: Dover Publications.
3.
BaradK (2007) Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
4.
BarfieldO (1988) Saving the Appearances: A Study in Idolatry. 2nd edition. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.
5.
BattleM (2009) Reconciliation: The Ubuntu Theology Of Desmond Tutu. Revised. Updated ed. Cleveland, OH: Pilgrim Press.
6.
BennettJ (2010) Vibrant Matter: A Political Ecology of Things. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
7.
BorgM J (1998) The God We Never Knew: Beyond Dogmatic Religion to a More Authentic Contemporary Faith. San Francisco, CA: HarperOne.
8.
BraunBSchindlerSWilleT (2019) Rethinking agency in international relations: performativity, performances and actor-networks. Journal of International Relations and Development22(4): 787–807. DOI: 10.1057/s41268-018-0147-z.
9.
BrettA S (2021) Between History, Politics and Law: History of Political Thought and History of International Law. In: BrettAnnabel SDonaldsonMeganKoskenniemiMartti (ed) History, Politics, Law: Thinking through the International. Cambridge, United Kingdom, NY: Cambridge University Press, 19–48.
10.
BruteauB (1997) God’s Ecstasy: The Creation of a Self-Creating World. First Prinitng edition. New York: Crossroad.
11.
BurkeAFishelSMitchellA, et al. (2016) Planet politics: a manifesto from the end of IR. Millennium: Journal of International Studies44(3): 499–523. DOI: 10.1177/0305829816636674.
12.
CartwrightN (1983) How the Laws of Physics Lie. Oxford: New York: Oxford University Press.
13.
Cartwright N (2007) Hunting Causes and Using Them: Approaches in Philosophy and Economics. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.
14.
ConnollyW (2002) Neuropolitics: Thinking, Culture, Speed. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
15.
Daigle M (2016) Writing the lives of others: storytelling and international politics. Millennium: Journal of International Studies45(1): 25–42. DOI: 10.1177/0305829816656415.
16.
DauphineeE (2010) The ethics of autoethnography. Review of International Studies36(03): 799–818. DOI: 10.1017/S0260210510000690.
DeweyJArthurB (1949) Knowing and the Known. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
19.
EckersleyR (2004) The Green State: Rethinking Democracy and Sovereignty. Boston, MA: MIT Press.
20.
Emirbayer M and Goodwin J (1994) Network analysis, culture, and the problem of agency. American Journal of Sociology99: 1411–1454.
21.
FitzmauriceA (ed), (2014) Sovereignty, Property and Empire, 1500–2000. Ideas in Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781139924306.001.
22.
FriedmanR (1996) The Hidden Face of God. New York: HarperOne.
23.
GeertzC (1973) The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books.
24.
George J (1989) International relations and the search for thinking space: another view of the third debate. International Studies Quarterly33(3): 269–279. DOI: 10.2307/2600460.
25.
Hafner-BurtonEMKahlerMMontgomeryAH, et al. (2009) Network analysis for international relations. International Organization63(3): 559–592. DOI: 10.1017/S0020818309090195.
26.
HeideggerM (1927) Being and Time. San Francisco: HarperCollins.
27.
Heidegger M (1984) The Metaphysical Foundations of Logic. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
28.
HuxleyA (1944) The Perennial Philosophy. New York: Harper Collins.
29.
InayatullahNBlaneyDL (1996) Knowing encounters: beyond parochialism in international relations theory. In: YosefLapidKratochwilFriedrich (eds) The Return of Culture and Identity in IR Theory. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, pp. 65–84.
30.
Inayatullah N and Blaney DL (2004) International Relations and the Problem of Difference. London: Routledge.
31.
JacksonPT (2009) The perpetual decline of the west. In: BrowningChristopherChristopherMarko (ed) The Struggle for the West: A Divided/Contested Legacy. London: Routledge, 53–71.
32.
Jackson PT and Nexon DH (2017) The production of facts: ideal-typification and the preservation of politics. In: Ned LebowRichard (ed) Max Weber and International Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 79–96. DOI: 10.1017/9781108236461.004.
33.
Jackson PT and Nexon DH (1999) Relations before states:. European Journal of International Relations5(3): 291–332.
34.
Jackson PT (2013) International theory in a post-paradigmatic era: from substantive wagers to scientific ontologies. European Journal of International Relations19(3): 543–565. DOI: 10.1177/1354066113495482.
35.
Kessler O and Lenglet M (2020) Between concepts and thought: digital technologies and temporal relationality. International Relations34(3): 413–431. DOI: 10.1177/0047117820948199.
36.
Kim RE (2020) Is global governance fragmented, polycentric, or complex? the state of the art of the network approach. International Studies Review22(4): 903–931. DOI: 10.1093/isr/viz052.
37.
KingGKeohaneROVerbaS (1994) Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
38.
KurkiM (2020) International Relations in a Relational Universe. New Product. New York: Oxford University Press.
39.
LevineDJ (2012) Recovering International Relations: The Promise of Sustainable Critique. New York: Oxford University Press.
40.
Lie JHS (2013) Challenging anthropology: anthropological reflections on the ethnographic turn in international relations. Millennium: Journal of International Studies41(2): 201–220. DOI: 10.1177/0305829812463835.
41.
Ling LHM (2013) The Dao of World Politics: Towards a Post-Westphalian, Worldist International Relations. New York: Routledge.
42.
LoyD (2010) Nonduality: A Study in Comparative Philosophy. Reprint edition. Humanity Books.
43.
MacKay J and Levin J (2015) Hanging out in international politics: two kinds of explanatory political ethnography for IR. International Studies Review17(2): 163–188. DOI: 10.1111/misr.12208.
44.
MetzingerT (2003) Being No One: The Self-Model Theory of Subjectivity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
45.
MurphyMPA (2021) Analogy or actuality? how social scientists are taking the quantum leap. In: Quantum Social Theory for Critical International Relations Theorists : Quantizing Critique. Palgrave Studies in International Relations. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 37–57. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-60111-9_3.
46.
NexonDHThomasW (2007) What’s at stake in the American empire debate. American Political Science Review101(02): 253–271.
47.
Ngcoya M (2015) Ubuntu: toward an emancipatory cosmopolitanism?International Political Sociology9(3): 248–262. DOI: 10.1111/ips.12095.
48.
PadgettJFAnsellCK (1993) Robust action and the rise of the medici, 1400-1434. American Journal of Sociology98(6): 1259–1319.
49.
Philipsen L (2020) Improvising the international: theorizing the everyday of intervention from the field. Cooperation and Conflict55(2): 151–169. DOI: 10.1177/0010836719896609.
50.
QinY (2018) A Relational Theory of World Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/9781316869505.
51.
Qin Y and Nordin AHM (2019) Relationality and rationality in confucian and western traditions of thought. Cambridge Review of International Affairs32(5): 601–614. DOI: 10.1080/09557571.2019.1641470.
52.
QuerejazuA (2016) Encountering the pluriverse: looking for alternatives in other worlds. Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional59(2). DOI: 10.1590/0034-7329201600207.
53.
RohrR (2012) Immortal Diamond: The Search for Our True Self. Kindle. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
54.
SchulteNJW (1995) The Myth of the West: America as the Last Empire. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans.
55.
SearleJ (1995) The Construction of Social Reality. New York: Free Press.
56.
Selimovic JM (2019) Everyday agency and transformation: place, body and story in the divided city. Cooperation and Conflict54(2): 131–148. DOI: 10.1177/0010836718807510.
57.
Shahi D and Ascione G (2016) Rethinking the absence of post-western international relations theory in India: ‘advaitic monism’ as an alternative epistemological resource. European Journal of International Relations22(2): 313–334. DOI: 10.1177/1354066115592938.
58.
ShihC-y (2020) China and International Theory: The Balance of Relationships. London: Routledge.
Shimizu K and Noro S (2020) An east Asian approach to temporality, subjectivity and ethics: bringing mahāyāna buddhist ontological ethics of nikon into international relations. Cambridge Review of International AffairsDecember: 1–19. DOI: 10.1080/09557571.2020.1859463.
61.
ShotterJ (1993) Cultural Politics of Everyday Life. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
62.
StephansonA (1995) Manifest Destiny: American Expansion and the Empire of Right. New York: Hill and Wang.
63.
Sylvan D and Majeski S (1998) A methodology for the study of historical counterfactuals. International Studies Quarterly42(1): 79–108.
64.
TicknerABAmayaQ (2020) The rights of mother earth: a pluriversal reading of climate change governance. In: TeoAnneWynne-HughesElisaPostcolonial Governmentalities. UK: Reino Unido: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc, 217–238.
65.
TillyC (1998) International communities, secure or otherwise. AdlerEmanuelBarnettMichael (ed) Security Communities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 397–412.
66.
TrownsellT (2021) Recrafting ontology. Review of International Studies1–20. DOI: 10.1017/S0260210521000668.
67.
TrownsellTATicknerABQuerejazuA, et al. (2021) Differing about difference: relational IR from around the world. International Studies Perspectives22(1): 25–64. DOI: 10.1093/isp/ekaa008.
68.
WeberM (1994) Wissenschaft Als Beruf • Politik Als Beruf. Tübingen: W.J. Mommsen and W. Schluchter, J. C. B. Mohr
69.
WendtA (2015) Quantum Mind and Social Science: Unifying Physical and Social Ontology. Cambridge ; New York: Cambridge University Press.
70.
WhiteSK (2000) Sustaining Affirmation: The Strengths of Weak Ontology in Political Theory. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
71.
YongC (2020) Global emotion studies in IR: embracing non-western voices. In: EunYong-Soo (ed) Going Beyond Parochialism and Fragmentation in the Study of International Relations, 113-133. London: Routledge.
72.
ZanottiL (2019) Ontological Entanglements, Agency and Ethics in International Relations. London: Routledge.
