Mental pictures, structural constraints: Kenneth N. Waltz’s approach to theory
| Published date | 01 June 2024 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/17550882231193116 |
| Author | Serdar Ş Güner |
| Date | 01 June 2024 |
https://doi.org/10.1177/17550882231193116
Journal of International Political Theory
2024, Vol. 20(2) 122 –139
© The Author(s) 2023
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/17550882231193116
journals.sagepub.com/home/ipt
Mental pictures, structural
constraints: Kenneth N.
Waltz’s approach to theory
Serdar Ş Güner
Bilkent University, Turkey
Abstract
The aim of this article is to develop Kenneth N. Waltz’s conceptualization of system
structures based on the distribution of capabilities to those described by two traits at
system-level: the distribution of capabilities across states and states’ geographic positions
with respect to each other, that is, the contiguity configuration. The development
generates taxonomies of structures evaluated as mental pictures that guide, organize,
and channel thoughts by identifying the ways system structures constrain international
interactions. Mental pictures are argued to derive from a multiplicity of interrelated
neurophysiological processes of the brain according to functionalism which is a monist
doctrine of the philosophy of mind. Mental pictures establish structural constraints as
products of an algorithm based on realism and system theory depicting a neo-Kantian
view of how our minds impose order on sensory data.
Keywords
Neo-Kantianism, philosophy of mind, philosophy of science, structural constraints,
structural realism, topology
This paper asks two questions: how can Kenneth N. Waltz’s picture theory be reformu-
lated and what can be gained from such a reformulation? Answers to these abstract ques-
tions help to understand whether Waltz’s concept of structural constraints shed light upon
the current Ukraine-Russia conflict. One might qualify that answers are irrelevant
because the scope of the theory is the recurrence of phenomena like formations of bal-
ances of power. The paper claims otherwise: it is possible to ponder and to reflect on a
singular event to explore how structural constraints confine international interactions.
Corresponding author:
Serdar Ş Güner, Faculty of Economics Administrative and Social Sciences, Bilkent University, Ankara, 06800,
Turkey.
Email: sguner@bilkent.edu.tr
1193116IPT0010.1177/17550882231193116Journal of International Political TheoryGüner
review-article2023
Article
Correction (May 2024): Article updated to correct the article type from “Review” to “Article”.
Güner 123
The paper proposes that not only the distribution of capabilities across states but also
states’ geographic positions with respect to each other, that is, the contiguity configura-
tion, reflect states’ positional pictures taking anarchy as the constant principle of organi-
zation of international politics. The proposed reformulation is based on three claims by
Waltz. First, “To define a structure requires ignoring how units relate with one another
(how they interact) and concentrating on how they stand in relation to one another (how
they are arranged or positioned). How units stand in relation to one another, the way they
are arranged or positioned, is not a property of the units. The arrangement of units is a
property of the system” (Waltz, 1979: 80). Hence, Waltz’s conceptualization implies that
states’ geographic positions or arrangement is a property of the system. Second, Waltz
(1979: 98) maintains that “capabilities are attributes of units, the distribution of capabili-
ties is not.” Waltz’s conceptualization implies the distinction between state and system-
level traits. It follows that states’ individual geographic positions are state-level attributes,
but the contiguity configuration constitutes a trait at system-level. Third, Waltz (1979:
99) proposes that “Market structure is defined by counting firms; international political
structure, by counting states. In the counting, distinctions are made only according to
capabilities.” The reformulation implies that structures of international systems are
defined by counting states according to the contiguity configuration and distribution of
capabilities.
The second task of the paper stems from Waltz’s definition of theory as “a picture,
mentally formed, of a bounded realm or domain of activity” (Waltz, 1979: 8). The dual
aspect of the definition refers to physical substance of a domain and non-physical mental
pictures implying that knowledge of international politics does not exist independently
of mind. Waltz (1997: 913) indicates that “As the molecular biologist Gunther Stent has
put it: “Reality is constructed by the mind . . . the recognition of structures is nothing
else than the selective destruction of information (Stent, 1973: E17).” If mind constructs
reality of the bounded domain of international politics, then Waltz’s theory definition
requires an answer to the question of how mind functions. The duality of mind and mat-
ter constitutes a central topic in the philosophy of mind (Chalmers, 1996; Churchland,
1996; Dennett, 1991). Therefore, there is need to concentrate on how Waltz’s definition
resonates in the philosophy of science and mind. The task necessitates appraisals of
structures of international systems as mental pictures and their connections with reality
(Churchland, 1984).
The reformulation reveals the complexity of mental pictures in simple terms using
realism and systems theory. Waltz’s definition relies on neo-Kantianism implying that
material worlds of international politics are mental constructions which generate a mul-
tiplicity of positional pictures of states. Functionalism, as a materialist philosophy of
mind, supports the conceptualization of positional pictures as being brain products.
Mental pictures indistinct from brain are categorized in terms of taxonomies which illus-
trate how simple rules create complexities (Bendor and Hammond, 1992: 309). An
advantage of the reformulation is its applicability in diverse areas of international poli-
tics. Positional pictures do not need to be assessed only by realism and system theory.
States can occupy diverse positions in international systems regarding international
issues like human rights, the problem of climate change and the response to pandemics.
Pictures would then obtain using alternative concepts and measures and serve to open
new avenues of theoretical research.
To continue reading
Request your trial