Abstract
Scholars from the recent ‘practice turn’ in International Relations have urged us to
rethink the international realm in terms of practices. The principal exponents of the turn,
Emanuel Adler and Vincent Pouliot, have refurbished Pierre Bourdieu’s theory of practice to
produce their own account of international practices. In a review of the practice turn, Chris
Brown has argued that Bourdieu’s notion of practice shares basic affinities with Aristotle’s
concept of praxis. While practice turn scholars may not adhere to a rigid canon of thought,
they seem to share an Aristotelian conception of praxis. This reading of the turn to practice,
though plausible, captures one part of the story. The central thesis of the present article is
that instead of one there are two, distinctive conceptions of practice – Aristotelian and
Wittgensteinian – and therefore two distinctive ways in which the character of international
practices might be understood. More concretely, the aim is to show that the conception of
international practices, rooted in Wittgenstein’s view of practices as language-games, can be
particularly illuminating to all those who seek to understand international relations.