Neoclassical realism (NCR)’s opponents have considered it an incoherent and indistinctive approach because of its interest in addressing ideational and institutional factors. Specifically, they have denounced NCR’s fuzzily established internal and external conceptual boundaries, corresponding to central dimensions of this approach’s ‘indistinguishability’ problem. Even though NCR has responded in a sophisticated manner to its critics, such a response still falls short of advancing some subtle strategies to forge NCR’s theoretical identity and research design. To fill this gap, I distinguish several neoclassical realist theories (Types I, II, IIA, IIB and III) to clarify NCR works’ common ground and the several options available to the analyst to cope with the indistinguishability problem’s internal dimension. Furthermore, I compare neoclassical realist theories with organizational, bureaucratic, realist, liberal and constructivist approaches to foreign policy to discuss the indistinguishability problem’s external dimension. Dealing with this dimension entails acknowledging that neoclassical realist theories provide a top-down, as compared to a bottom-up approach to explain foreign policy as a policy rather than a process. It also provides a thorough explanation rather than a parsimonious account aimed at distinguishing independent and intervening variables. With different intensities, neoclassical realist theories embrace specific, refined logics of consequentialism rather than appropriateness to explain distinct state preferences rather than assuming power maximization or security seeking as pre-fixed state goals.

中文翻译：

---

新古典现实主义相对于其他外交政策理论：认真对待不可区分性问题


新古典现实主义（NCR）的反对者认为它是一种不连贯且不明确的方法，因为它关注于解决观念和制度因素。具体来说，他们谴责 NCR 模糊地建立的内部和外部概念边界，对应于这种方法“不可区分”问题的中心维度。尽管NCR对其批评者做出了复杂的回应，但这种回应仍然未能提出一些微妙的策略来打造NCR的理论身份和研究设计。为了填补这一空白，我区分了几种新古典现实主义理论（类型 I、II、IIA、IIB 和 III），以阐明 NCR 作品的共同点以及分析师可用于应对不可区分性问题的内部维度的几种选择。此外，我将新古典现实主义理论与组织、官僚、现实主义、自由主义和建构主义的外交政策方法进行比较，以讨论不可区分性问题的外部维度。处理这个维度需要承认新古典现实主义理论提供了一种自上而下的方法，而不是自下而上的方法来将外交政策解释为政策而不是过程。它还提供了彻底的解释，而不是旨在区分自变量和干预变量的简约说明。新古典现实主义理论以不同的强度拥抱具体的、精致的结果主义逻辑，而不是解释不同国家偏好的适当性，而不是假设权力最大化或安全寻求作为预先设定的国家目标。