PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 19, 2026Alternatives Global Local Political0 citations

Toward an Affective-Relational Ontology of Peace

View Full Paper
MYMinji YooEwha Womans University Medical Center

Key Points

  • The aim is to explore how ontological assumptions shape the concept of peace, focusing on vulnerability and relationality.
  • Engages with Critical Peace and Conflict Studies (CPCS) debates.
  • Draws on feminist care theory to develop an affective-relational perspective.
  • Analyzes the implications of hybridity and local practices within peace discourses.
  • Discovers that vulnerability is integral to understanding peace constructs.
  • Argues that care is a relational condition that intertwines ontology, epistemology, and ethics.
  • Highlights the need to extend relational thinking beyond just human-centered frameworks.

Abstract

Critical Peace and Conflict Studies (CPCS) has played an important role in questioning liberal peace through the local turn and the concept of hybridity. Much of this work, however, has tended to focus on epistemological concerns related to recognition and representation, while paying comparatively less attention to the ontological assumptions that underpin how peace is imagined. This tendency is particularly visible in discussions that describe peace as a process, which often continue to imply a normative horizon of positive peace. This paper engages with these debates by foregrounding vulnerability as a constitutive condition of being. Drawing on feminist care theory, it develops an affective-relational perspective that understands beings as inherently exposed, responsive, and relationally embedded. Rather than approaching care as a moral value or normative ideal, the paper treats it as a relational condition through which questions of ontology, epistemology, and ethics become intertwined. From this perspective, the ambivalence frequently associated with hybridity and the local can be read not simply as a problem of practice, but as reflecting broader tensions within prevailing ways of thinking about peace. By taking vulnerability and affectability seriously, the paper contributes to ongoing discussions by reorienting how peace is approached, and by suggesting the relevance of extending relational thinking beyond human-centred frameworks to include human–nonhuman relations.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Minji Yoo (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6996a788ecb39a600b3ed3d3https://doi.org/10.1177/03043754261427891
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Lulik encounters and cultural frictions in East Timor: Past and present2014 · 37 citations
  2. 2Indigenous Peace-Making Versus the Liberal Peace2008 · 567 citations
  3. 3Meeting the Universe Halfway2007 · 10,272 citations
  4. 4The Use and Misuse of the ‘Local Turn’2024 · 9 citations
  5. 5Decolonising Framings in Pacific Research: Indigenous Fijian Vanua Research Framework as an Organic Response2008 · 175 citations