Element contents
Evolution in International Relations
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 February 2025
Summary
Scholars of international relations (IR) and evolution pay little attention to each other's fields. However, there is a need to examine evolution's impacts in IR. International actors such as nations are made up of people, so evolved human nature has an impact on relations within and between states. Accordingly, this pathbreaking Element will attempt to apply insights from evolutionary biology, evolutionary psychology, neuroscience, and archaeogenetics to IR. Among such insights are the evolved role of emotions in decision-making, intergroup competition as a driver of in-group cooperation, and culture, morality, and language as group-binding mechanisms. Homo sapiens is a primate, so comparison with the behaviours of other great apes reveals some commonalities in terms of group dynamics, status, and hierarchies, as well as the enduring human capacity for both in-group cooperation and organised violence against other groups. These have an evolutionary basis that is relevant to IR theory and practice.
Information
- Type
- Element
- Information
- Online ISBN: 9781009464154Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication: 06 March 2025
References
Abramitzky, R. (2018). The Mystery of the Kibbutz: Egalitarian Principles in a Capitalist World. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Alexander, R. D. (1990). How did humans evolve? Reflections on the uniquely unique species. Museum of Zoology (Special publication no. 1), Ann Arbor: University of Michigan. https://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/57178.Google Scholar
Anderson, C., Hildreth, J. A. D., & Howland, L. (2015). Is the desire for status a fundamental human motive? A review of the empirical literature. Psychological Bulletin, 141(3): 574–601. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ansary, T. (2010). Destiny Disrupted: A History of the World through Islamic Eyes. New York: PublicAffairs.Google Scholar
Axelrod, R., & Keohane, R. O. (1985). Achieving cooperation under anarchy: Strategies and institutions. World Politics, 38(1): 226–254. https://doi.org/10.2307/2010357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barkin, J. S. (2003). Realist constructivism. International Studies Review, 5(3): 325–342. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1079-1760.2003.00503002.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barkin, S. (2010). Realist Constructivism: Rethinking International Relations Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bieler, A., & Morton, A. D. (2004). A critical theory route to hegemony, world order and historical change: Neo-Gramscian perspectives in international relations. Capital & Class, 28(1): 85–113. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230627307_2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boehm, C. (1999). Hierarchy in the Forest: The Evolution of Egalitarian Behavior. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bousquet, A., & Curtis, S. (2011). Beyond models and metaphors: Complexity theory, systems thinking and international relations. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 24(1): 43–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/09557571.2011.558054.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowles, S. (2009). Did warfare among ancestral hunter-gatherers affect the evolution of human social behaviors? Science, 324(5932): 1293–1298. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1168112.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brown, C. (2013). ‘Human nature’, science and international political theory. Journal of International Relations and Development, 16(4): 435–454. https://doi.org/10.1057/jird.2013.17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, C. (2015). The Marxist perspective from “species-being” to natural justice. In Jacobi, D., & Freyberg-Inan, A. (eds.), Human Beings in International Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 95–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, K. (2018). China’s Dream: The Culture of Chinese Communism and the Secret Sources of Its Power. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Bruner, J. (1987). Actual Minds, Possible Worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Bull, H. (1977). The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buzan, B. (2004). From International to World Society? English School Theory and the Social Structure of Globalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Buzan, B., & Acharya, A. (2022). Re-imagining International Relations: World Orders in the Thought and Practice of Indian, Chinese, and Islamic Civilizations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Callahan, W. A. (2010). China: The Pessoptimist Nation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Carey, N. (2012). The Epigenetics Revolution: How Modern Biology is Rewriting Our Understanding of Genetics, Disease, and Inheritance. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Carr, E. H. (1981). The Twenty Years’ Crisis: 1919–1939: An Introduction to the Study of International Relations, 2nd ed. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Chapman, J. W. (1975). Rawls’s Theory of Justice. American Political Science Review, 69(2): 588–593. https://doi.org/10.2307/1959089.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1989). Preface. In Rocker, R. (ed.), Anarcho-Syndicalism. London: Pluto Press, pp. vi–vii.Google Scholar
Christakis, N. A. (2019). Blueprint: The Evolutionary Origin of a Good Society. New York: Little, Brown, Spark.Google Scholar
Chudek, M., & Henrich, J. (2011). Culture–gene coevolution, norm-psychology and the emergence of human prosociality. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15(5): 218–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2011.03.003.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Corning, P. A. (2023). Culture–gene co-evolution: Darwin’s other theory comes into view. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 139(4): 563–569. https://doi.org/10.1093/biolinnean/blac048.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coveney, P., & Highfeld, R. (1995). Frontiers of Complexity: The Search for Order in a Chaotic World. London: Faber and Faber.Google Scholar
Cox, R. W. (1981). Social forces, states and world orders: Beyond international relations theory. Millennium, 10(2): 126–155. https://doi.org/10.1177/03058298810100020501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, R. W. (1983). Gramsci, hegemony and international relations: An essay in method. Millennium, 12(2): 162–175. https://doi.org/10.1177/03058298830120020701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, R. W. (1987). Production, Power and World Order: Social Forces in the Making of History. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Crawford, N. C. (2016). Studying world politics as a complex adaptive system. In Booth, K., & Erskine, T. (eds.), International Relations Theory Today (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Polity Press, pp. 263–267.Google Scholar
Cudworth, E., & Hobden, S. (2011). Posthuman International Relations: Complexity, Ecologism and Global Politics. London: Zed Books.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Damasio, A. (2000). The Feeling of What Happens: Body, Emotion and the Making of Consciousness. London: Vintage.Google Scholar
David-Barrett, T. (2023). Human group size puzzle: Why it is odd that we live in large societies. Royal Society Open Science, 10(8): 230559. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.230559.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dehaene, S. (2009). Reading in the Brain: The Science and Evolution of a Human Invention. New York: Viking.Google Scholar
Dehaene, S., Pegado, F., Braga, L. W., et al. (2010). How learning to read changes the cortical networks for vision and language. Science, 330(6009): 1359–1364. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1194140CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Devetak, R. (2012). An introduction to international relations: The origins and changing agendas of a discipline. In Devetak, R., Burke, A., & George, J. (eds.), An Introduction to International Relations (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–19.Google Scholar
Devetak, R., Burke, A., & George, J. (eds.). An Introduction to International Relations (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
de Waal, F. (2005). Our Inner Ape: The Best and Worst of Human Nature. London: Granta.Google Scholar
Diamond, J. (1997). Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
Dias, B. G., & Ressler, K. J. (2014). Parental olfactory experience influences behavior and neural structure in subsequent generations. Nature Neuroscience, 17(1): 89–96. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.3594.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dietl, G. P. (2008). Selection, security, and evolutionary international relations. In Sagarin, R. D., & Taylor, T. (eds.), Natural Security: A Darwinian Approach to a Dangerous World. Berkeley: University of California Press, pp. 86–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diez, T. (2005). Constructing the Self and Changing Others: Reconsidering “Normative Power Europe.” Millennium, 33(3): 613–636. https://doi.org/10.1177/03058298050330031701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, J. (2009). Language and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellison, T. M., & Reinöhl, U. (2022). Compositionality, Metaphor, and the Evolution of Language. International Journal of Primatology, 45: 703–719. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10764-022-00315-w.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Facundo, M., Sahakian, B., Clark, L., et al. (2002). Decision‐making processes following damage to the prefrontal cortex. Brain, 125(3), 624–639. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awf049.Google Scholar
Forbes, A. A., & Krimmel, B. A. (2010). Evolution is change in the inherited traits of a population through successive generations. Nature Education Knowledge, 3(10): 6. www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/evolution-is-change-in-the-inherited-traits-15164254/.Google Scholar
Francois, P., Fujiwara, T., & van Ypersele, T. (2018). The origins of human prosociality: Cultural group selection in the workplace and the laboratory. Science Advances 4: eaat2201. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aat2201.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Freeston, M. H., Rhéaume, J., Letarte, H., Dugas, M. J., & Ladouceur, R. (1994). Why do people worry? Personality and Individual Differences, 17(6): 791–802. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(94)90048-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gammon, E. (2020). Affective neuroscience, emotional regulation, and international relations. International Theory, 12(2): 189–219. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1752971919000253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garlick, J. (2020a). Bringing human nature back in: The implications of neuroscience, psychology and evolution for international relations (IR) theory. Academia Letters, Article 84. https://doi.org/10.20935/AL84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garlick, J. (2020b). The Impact of China’s Belt and Road Initiative: From Asia to Europe. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Garlick, J. (2024). Advantage China: Agent of Change in an Era of Global Disruption. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Garlick, J., & Qin, F. (2023a). China’s normative power in central and eastern europe: “16/17 + 1” cooperation as a tale of unfulfilled expectations. Europe-Asia Studies, 75(4): 583–605. https://doi.org/10.1080/09668136.2023.2179601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garlick, J., & Qin, F. (2023b). China’s “do-as-I-do” paradigm: Practice-based normative diplomacy in the global South. The Pacific Review, 37(5): 985–1015. https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2023.2290619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelfand, M. J., Raver, J. L., Nishii, L., et al. (2011). Differences between tight and loose cultures: A 33-nation study. Science, 332(6033): 1100–1104. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1197754CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Geyer, R., & Harrison, N. E. (2022). From order to complexity: The natural and social sciences. In Harrison, N. E., & Geyer, R. (eds.), Governing Complexity in the 21st Century. Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 14–32.Google Scholar
Giddens, A. (1984). The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Goldstein, J. S., & Pevehouse, J. C. (2014). International Relations (10th ed.). Harlow: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
Graeber, D. (2004). Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology. Chicago: Prickly Paradigm Press.Google Scholar
Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the Prison Notebooks (ed. & translated by Hoare, Q., & Smith, G. N.). New York: International.Google Scholar
Haidt, J. (2012). The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion. London: Allen Lane.Google Scholar
Hare, B. (2017). Survival of the friendliest: Homo sapiens evolved via selection for prosociality. Annual Review of Psychology, 68: 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010416-044201.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hare, B., Wobber, V., & Wrangham, R. (2012). The self-domestication hypothesis: Evolution of bonobo psychology is due to selection against aggression. Animal Behaviour 83: 573–585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2011.12.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hare, B., & Woods, V. (2020). Survival of the Friendliest: Understanding Our Origins and Rediscovering Our Common Humanity. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Harrison, N. E. (ed.) (2006). Complexity in World Politics: Concepts and Methods of a New Paradigm. Albany: State University of New York Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Havercroft, J., & Prichard, A. (2017). Anarchy and international relations theory: A reconsideration. Journal of International Political Theory, 13(3): 252–265. https://doi.org/10.1177/1755088217719911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Held, D. (1980). Introduction to Critical Theory: Horkheimer to Habermas. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henrich, J. (2004). Cultural group selection, coevolutionary processes and large-scale cooperation. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 53(1): 3–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-2681(03)00094-5.Google Scholar
Henrich, J. (2016). The Secret of Our Success: How Culture is Driving Human Evolution, Domesticating Our Species, and Making Us Smarter. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henrich, J. (2020) The Weirdest People in the World: How the West Became Psychologically Peculiar and Particularly Prosperous. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar
Henrich, J, Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(2–3): 61–83. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0999152X.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Herrnstein, R. J. (1990). Rational choice theory: Necessary but not sufficient. American Psychologist, 45(3): 356–367. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0003-066X.45.3.356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heying, H., & Weinstein, B. (2021). A Hunter-Gatherer’s Guide to the 21st Century: Evolution and the Challenges of Modern Life. New York: Portfolio.Google Scholar
Hobson, J. M. (2004). The Eastern Origins of Western Civilisation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofstede, G., & Hofstede, G. J. (2005). Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Holmes, M. (2014). International Politics at the Brain’s Edge: Social Neuroscience and a New “Via Media.” International Studies Perspectives, 15(2): 209–228. https://doi.org/10.1111/insp.12012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hui, V. T. (2005). War and State Formation in Ancient China and Early Modern Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, P. T., & Nexon, D. H. (2009). Paradigmatic faults in international-relations theory. International Studies Quarterly, 53(4): 907–930. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2478.2009.00562.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, R., & Sorensen, G. (2006). Introduction to International Relations: Theories and Approaches (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Jacobi, D., & Freyberg-Inan, A. (2015). Introduction: Human being(s) in international relations. In Jacobi, D., & Freyberg-Inan, A. (eds.), Human Beings in International Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jervis, R. (1997). System Effects: Complexity in Political and Social Life. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Kang, D. C. (2012). East Asia before the West: Five Centuries of Trade and Tribute. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Kauffman, S. (1995). At Home in the Universe: The Search for Laws of Self-Organization and Complexity. London: Viking.Google Scholar
Kavalski, E. (2013). The struggle for recognition of normative powers: Normative power Europe and normative power China in context. Cooperation and Conflict, 48(2): 247–267. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010836713485386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kavalski, E. (2015). Complexifying IR: Disturbing the “deep Newtonian slumber” of the mainstream. In Kavalski, E. (ed.), World Politics at the Edge of Chaos: Reflections on Complexity and Global Life. Albany: State University of New York Press, pp. 253–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keohane, R. O., & Nye, J. S. (1977). Power and Interdependence: World Politics in Transition. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
King, G., Keohane, R. O., & Verba, S. (1994). Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kinvall, C., & Mitzen, J. (2020). Anxiety, fear, and ontological security in world politics: Thinking with and beyond Giddens. International Theory, 12(2): 240–256. https://doi.org/10.1017/S175297192000010X.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knutsen, T. L. (1997). A History of International Relations Theory (2nd ed.). Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Krause, J., & Trappe, T. (2021). A Short History of Humanity: A New History of Old Europe. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Kwan, A. S. C. (2016). Hierarchy, status and international society: China and the steppe nomads. European Journal of International Relations, 22(2): 362–383. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066115598385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lacan, J. (2006). Écrits: The First Complete Edition in English, transl. by Fink, B. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980a). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980b). The Metaphorical Structure of the Human Conceptual System. Cognitive Science, 4: 195–208. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0402_4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lebow, R. N. (2017). Evolution, adaptation, and imitation in international relations. Oxford Research Encyclopedias, Politics. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lederer, E. M. (2024). Russia vetoes a resolution calling for the prevention of a dangerous nuclear arms race in space. The Associated Press, 25 April. https://apnews.com/article/nuclear-arms-space-un-us-japan-russia-175d45ddb658729eff060bd8a83b8a55.Google Scholar
Lenin, V. I. (1999). Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism. Sydney: Resistance Books.Google Scholar
Lerner, J. S., Li, Y., Valdesolo, P., & Kassam, K. S. (2015). Emotion and decision making. Annual Review of Psychology, 66(1): 799–823. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115043.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Longrich, N. R. (2019). Were other humans the first victims of the sixth mass extinction? The Conversation, 21 November. https://theconversation.com/were-other-humans-the-first-victims-of-the-sixth-mass-extinction-126638.Google Scholar
Lupovici, A. (2013). Me and the other in International Relations: An alternative pluralist International Relations 101. International Studies Perspectives, 14(3): 235–254. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1528-3585.2012.00473.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mahant, E. (2019). I’ve changed, I really have: Identity, regime change and ontological security. Canadian Foreign Policy Journal, 25(2): 188–202. https://doi.org/10.1080/11926422.2019.1571426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manners, I. (2002). Normative power Europe: A contradiction in terms? Journal of Common Market Studies, 40(2): 235–258. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5965.00353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marks, M. P. (2011). Metaphors in International Relations Theory. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marks, M. P. (2018). Revisiting Metaphors in International Relations Theory. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayseless, O. (2016). The Caring Motivation: An Integrated Theory. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mazzocchi, F. (2008). Complexity in biology: Exceeding the limits of reductionism and determinism using complexity theory. EMBO Reports, 9(1): 10–14. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.embor.7401147.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McDermott, R., & Davenport, C. (2017). Toward an evolutionary theory of international relations. Oxford Research Encyclopedias, Politics. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milliken, J. (1999). The study of discourse in International Relations: A critique of research and method. European Journal of International Relations, 5(2): 225–254. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066199005002003.Google Scholar
Mitzen, J. (2006). Ontological security in world politics: State identity and the security dilemma. European Journal of International Relations, 12(3): 341–370. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066106067346.Google Scholar
Moore, G. J. (2020). Niebuhrian International Relations: The Ethics of Foreign Policymaking. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgenthau, H. J. (1948). Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Murray, M. (2019). The Struggle for Recognition in International Relations: Status, Revisionism, and Rising Powers. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Muthukrishna, M., Doebeli, M., Chudek, M., & Henrich, J. (2018). The cultural brain hypothesis: How culture drives brain expansion, sociality, and life history. PLoS Computational Biology, 14: e1006504. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006504.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Neumann, I. B. (1996). Self and other in International Relations. European Journal of International Relations, 2(2): 139–174. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066196002002001.Google Scholar
Niebuhr, R. (1941). The Nature and Destiny of Man: A Christian Interpretation: Volume I: Human Nature. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.Google Scholar
Pagel, M. (2017). Q&A: What is human language, when did it evolve and why should we care? BMC Biology, 15, Article number 64. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12915-017-0405-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paul, D. B. (2003). Darwin, social Darwinism and eugenics. In Hooge, J., & Radick, G. (eds.), The Cambridge Companion to Darwin. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 214–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Penttinen, E. (2013). Posthumanism and feminist international relations. Politics & Gender, 9(1): 96–100. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X12000736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prigogine, I., & Stengers, I. (1985). Order out of Chaos: Man’s New Dialogue with Nature. London: Flamingo.Google Scholar
Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reiter, D. (2015). Should we leave behind the subfield of international relations? Annual Review of Political Science, 18: 481–499. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-053013-041156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rennstich, J. K. (2018). Evolutionary systems theory: Concepts and schools in international relations. Oxford Research Encyclopedias, International Studies. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190846626.013.391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenberg, J. (1990). What’s the matter with realism? Review of International Studies, 16(4): 285–303. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0260210500112379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, B. C., & Wight, C. (2023). Rationalism and the “rational actor assumption” in realist international relations theory. Journal of International Political Theory, 19(2): 158–182. https://doi.org/10.1177/17550882221144643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schuett, R. (2010). Classical realism, Freud and human nature in international relations. History of the Human Sciences, 23(2): 21–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/0952695110361421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sil, R., & Katzenstein, P. J. (2010). Analytic eclecticism in the study of world politics: Reconfiguring problems and mechanisms across research traditions. Perspectives on Politics, 8(2): 411–431. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592710001179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sil, R., & Katzenstein, P. J. (2011). Beyond Paradigms: Analytic Eclecticism in the Study of World Politics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Snidal, D. (1985). The game theory of international politics. World Politics, 38(1): 25–57. https://doi.org/10.2307/2010350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steele, B. J. (2007). Ontological Security in International Relations: Self-Identity and the IR State. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Sterling-Folker, J. (2001). Evolutionary tendencies in realist and liberal IR theory. In Thompson, R. W. (ed.), Evolutionary Interpretations of World Politics. Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 62–109.Google Scholar
Sterling-Folker, J. (2006). Lamarckian with a vengeance: Human nature and American International Relations theory. Journal of International Relations and Development, 9(3): 227–246. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jird.1800092.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Storr, W. (2021). The Status Game: On Social Position and How We Use It. London: William Collins.Google Scholar
Suntsova, M. V., & Buzdin, A. A. (2020). Differences between human and chimpanzee genomes and their implications in gene expression, protein functions and biochemical properties of the two species. BMC Genomics, 21 (Suppl 7): 535. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-020-06962-8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taleb, N. N. (2008) The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Tang, S. (2013). The Social Evolution of International Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tang, S. (2020). On Social Evolution: Phenomenon and Paradigm. Abingdon: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tannenwald, N. (2005). Ideas and explanation: Advancing the theoretical agenda. Journal of Cold War Studies, 7(2): 13-42. https://doi.org/10.1162/1520397053630619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tay, L., & Diener, E. (2011). Needs and subjective well-being around the world. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(2): 354–365. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0023779.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Testot, L. (2020). Cataclysms: An Environmental History of Humanity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Thompson, R. W. (ed.) (2001). Evolutionary Interpretations of World Politics. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Turchin, P., Currie, T. E., Turner, E. A. L., & Gavrilets, S. (2013). War, space, and the evolution of old world complex societies. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 110(41): 16384–16389. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1308825110.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Turchin, P., & Gavrilets, S. (2009). Evolution of complex hierarchical societies. Social Evolution & History, 8(2): 167–198. www.sociostudies.org/journal/articles/140588/.Google Scholar
Turner, J. H. (2021). On Human Nature: The Biology and Sociology of What Made Us Human. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Tuzin, D. (2001). Social Complexity in the Making: A Case Study among the Arapesh of New Guinea. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
van Gaal, S., De Lange, F. P., & Cohen, M. X. (2012). The role of consciousness in cognitive control and decision making. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6: 121. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2012.00121.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vince, G. (2019). Transcendence: How Humans Evolved through Fire, Language, Beauty and Time. London: Allen Lane.Google Scholar
Viotti, P. R., & Kauppi, M. V. (2001). International Relations and World Politics: Security, Economy, Identity (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Wæver, O. (1996). The rise and fall of the inter-paradigm debate. In Smith, S., Booth, K., & Zalewski, M. (eds.), International Theory: Positivism and Beyond. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 149–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waldrop, M. M. (1993). Complexity: The Emerging Science at the Edge of Order and Chaos. London: Viking.Google Scholar
Wallerstein, I. (1974). The Modern World-System I: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European World-Economy in the Sixteenth Century. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Waltz, K.N. (1959). Man, the State, and War: A Theoretical Analysis. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Waring, T. M., & Wood, Z. T. (2021). Long-term gene-culture co-evolution and the human evolutionary transition. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 288: 20210538. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2021.0538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wendt, A. (1992). Anarchy is what states make of it: The social construction of power politics. International Organization, 46(2): 391–425. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300027764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wendt, A. (1999). Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wight, C. (1996). Incommensurability and cross-paradigm communication in international relations theory: “What’s the frequency, Kenneth?” Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 22(2): 291–319. https://doi.org/10.1177/03058298960250020401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winston, C. (2018). Norm structure, diffusion, and evolution: A conceptual approach. European Journal of International Relations, 24(3): 638–661. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066117720794.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wrangham, R. (2019). The Goodness Paradox: How Evolution Made Us More and Less Violent. London: Profile Books.Google Scholar
Wrangham, R. W. (2009). Catching Fire: How Cooking Made Us Human. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Wright, R. (1996). The Moral Animal: Evolutionary Psychology and Everyday Life. London: Abacus.Google Scholar
Wucker, M. (2016). The Gray Rhino: How to Recognize and Act on the Obvious Dangers We Ignore. New York: St Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
Accessibility standard: Unknown
Why this information is here
This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.Accessibility Information
Accessibility compliance for the HTML of this element is currently unknown
and may be updated in the future.
- 1
- Cited by