Strategic Studies Quarterly

Abstract Practice Theory (PT) is one of the latest theoretical achievements in International Relations. This theory consists of different theoretical approaches that focus on studying international practices as stuff of international politics. This article argues that Practice Theory is based on specific meta-theoretical and philosophical foundations, that make it a distinct theory from other International Relations theories. Then, the main objective is to explore and explain the ontological, epistemological and methodological foundations of Practice Theory. It is argued that Practice Theory is based on “foundational pluralism”; a pluralistic and eclectic ontology, epistemology and methodology that go beyond dualistic metatheory of some other International Relations theories like Constructivism. So that, in relational ontology of Practice Theory dichotomies of reality/mind, theory/practice, structure/agency, constitution/causation, and materialism/ideationalism are all dissolved. Practice Theory epistemology is a pluralistic on implying explanation and understanding, simultaneously. Pluralistic methodology of Practice Theory is a combination of experimentalism, interpretivism and abduction or inference to the best explanation.

Abstract The subject – matter of soft power nowadays attracts attention of many countries, of researchers in IR and security studies and of practitioners to it. It yields for discussing security from soft dimension of it. Because it doesn’t subordinate to power and its focus on internationally perspective here is mentioning the security as an independently concept and externally/internally one. Soft security would be different, identify with and supplement of hard one in philological apprising, it does epistemologically definite in four paths in reducing appeal to use of force and removing pretext economic instrument for sanctions and punishments, being well situated for legitimating hard security and being attractive and the last section from the ontologically it comprises dimensions and spheres.

Abstract Alexander Vent as a distinguished constructivist thinker does argue that the problems of the scholars of international relations and the political scientists were just be understanding of global politics and power distribution without thinking about what constructed the global system and how it organized. Vent by reviewing the current schools of the international relations field is criticizing the neo – realism so that it is important but by focus on individualism and materialism is imperfect. That is paying more attention on decision makers without any mentioning on social structures that shapes the individuals. Crucial critique of Vent is deal with materialistic views of neo – realism as an objective willing and properties. Here the main hypothesis of the article by exploring the political from the constructivist view is that the political actors do often pursuit to substitute recognition on power (in the neo – realism) and wealth (in the neo – liberal view).