If we read political realism, social constructivism, and poststructuralism through their own lens, we might unveil antinomies which appear as unresolvable contradictions. More than once, the discovery of an antinomy has shaken the very founda-tions of an academic work. Whenever an academic work is revealed to contain antinomic statements, it requires explanation. It is as if a suspect accused of having committed a crime gives a contradictory alibi - perhaps the suspect speaks the truth, but she must make a clarification. Maybe, she even convinces us that the contradiction is no scientific crime at all. In the course of this investigation we are guided by two ambitions. At first, we read the theoretical works as testimonies or descriptions of both theorist and theory themselves. Secondly, we ask whether these self-images and self-descriptions can be stated in a consistent way, or if they fall into unresolvable antinomies. Hence, the underlying research question is plain: Do political realism, social constructivism, and poststructuralism harbour antinomic statements?     «

If we read political realism, social constructivism, and poststructuralism through their own lens, we might unveil antinomies which appear as unresolvable contradictions. More than once, the discovery of an antinomy has shaken the very founda-tions of an academic work. Whenever an academic work is revealed to contain antinomic statements, it requires explanation. It is as if a suspect accused of having committed a crime gives a contradictory alibi - perhaps the suspect speaks the truth, but she...     »