| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In IR, representation of knowledge is not neutral, but follows tacit conventions that have become naturalised in the field. In many ways, these conventions are shaped by the so-called 'science question', which has shaped the field since the first debate. This article explores three ways in which knowledge is represented in the discipline: numbers, graphical models, and metaphors. Numbers and formal models reinforce the 'science question' by the ways in which they exclude audiences, objectify representation and desocialise knowledge. Metaphors also fulfil objectifying functions, particularly through the ways that they link in with 'commonsense' knowledge and academic jargon. As will be argued in the concluding section of this article, attempts to escape these logics through the linguistic turn have not been successful at overcoming the politics of scientific representation in the field, and in some ways have even sustained them.
|