ABSTRACT
Diversity and pluralism in International Relations (IR) should not only involve theory as such, but also epistemology and methodology that underlie the building and operation of theory. An epistemological and methodological monoculture centred on positivism prevails across geo-cultural borders. Although there are various (Western) post-positivist theories, they have failed to transform disciplinary practices, and especially educational practices. The marginalisation of post-positivist scholarship in IR exists everywhere, the West and the non-West alike. What the "non-Western" IR theorisation enterprise should do first is widen the discussion by considering the issue of marginalisation beyond geographical concerns. The "non-Western" IR theory-building enterprise is based on the view that where a theory originates and who originates it matter a great deal. This belief resonates with post-positivist understandings of theory. Because the current parochialism of IR is not only geopolitical but also epistemological and methodological, ongoing projects of "non-Western" IR theory building need to refocus their attention, broadening range of their own questions and undertakings.
