Is Constructivism the Middle Ground Between Mainstream and Critical Theory? (Essay Sample)

CONSTRUCTIVISM IS THE MIDDLE GROUND BETWEEN MAINSTREAM AND CRITICAL THEORY. DISCUSS
Name of Student
Course
Name of Professor
University
City and State
Date of Submission
Is Constructivism the Middle Ground between Mainstream and Critical theory? Discuss
Since the cold war's conclusion, Constructivism as a radical theory has sprung into the sight of political science (Patmanathan et al., 2016). The Theory's supporters contended that this occurred and were necessary because traditional, mainstream Theory frequently misses the mark in predicting political change and, consequently, in explaining it after the fact. They argue that Constructivism is superior to mainstream theory in explaining political change because it places more weight on the importance of ideas. Constructivist institutionalism, in Hay's words, "had its beginnings in the progressively unfulfilled tries to cope with concerns of complicated, influential change, originally from inside the limitations of the current neo-institutionalist study" (Schmidt, 2010). Constructivism attempts to demolish preconceived beliefs of established institutions and narratives by establishing a causal relationship between ideas and change in a very prescriptive approach. This could make it seem like it is part of the critical theory suggest that it is more complicated than that. The paper argues that Constructivism provides a practical middle ground between these two schools of thought by critically bridging the gaps created by mainstream Theory. This is because, while its ontology is in line with conventional Theory, its epistemology is primarily critical.
Although it has frequently supplemented mainstream and non-critical viewpoints, Constructivism is a varied movement, including both critical and Marxian approaches to the field (Desa M, Noriah, and Rakhecha, 2001). Several constructivists, including Adler, have claimed that Constructivism lies somewhere between positivist and interpretative ontologies and have presented it as such. This article assesses this argument by examining where Constructivism Critical Theory, and established Theory all overlap.
Rather than an interpretative form of rationalism, as characterized by Keohane, or a variation of ‘relativism,' as stated by Desa M, Noriah, and Rakhecha (2001), this essay argues that Constructivism conquers the center ground amongst mainstream and critical theory.
By elevating ideas to a new analytic position and demonstrating that even the most long-lasting institutions are founded on shared understandings, Constructivism is often credited for radically reimagining the role of ideas and language in political analysis. Critical Theory is a more overtly normative method of social and political inquiry. While there are many schools of political thought, we will refer to those who carry on the work of thinkers like Horkheimer and Adorno from the Frankfurt School for clarity and analysis. This is how critical Theory differentiates itself from traditional, non-critical academia, which never considers such issues. Constructivism may also adopt a critical stance, offering critical theorists’ valuable tools for doing so.
Constructivism incredibly confronts only realism's and liberalism's ontological and epistemological tenets. In terms