A Quantitative Theory of War and Peace in the Gut Microbiota

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Libo Jiang ◽  
Xinjuan Liu ◽  
Mengmeng Sang ◽  
Jingwen Gan ◽  
Qian Wang ◽  
...  
2010 ◽  
Vol 145 (5) ◽  
pp. 1921-1950 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pierre Yared

2021 ◽  
pp. 229-334
Author(s):  
Arthur Ripstein

This chapter presents Arthur Ripstein’s responses to the authors of the preceding chapters. The chapter follows the order of the contributions, and are divided broadly into responses to the papers in Part I concerning the ways in which facts matter to right, and the relation between the flawed world in which we find ourselves and the ideal case that Kant contemplates, and to those in Part II dealing with more specific issues in the Kantian theory of war and peace.


2002 ◽  
Vol 55 (1) ◽  
pp. 137-166 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard N. Rosecrance

John Mearsheimer'sTragedy of Great Power Politicserrs in claiming that all national security decisions are rational ones. In contrast, sometimes state ambitions and actions go beyond what “rationality” typically would permit; sometimes states do not assert capabilities which they clearly possess. The explanations for such outcomes reside in realms that Mearsheimer either does not consider or dismisses too readily, such as alignments, democracy, ideology, and economic relationships. He also charts a role for the United States (a state confronting “the stopping power of water” that is too limited given the objectives (a balance of power) which he believes it should seek to create. His theory of war is too restricted and so therefore is his theory of peace. But he has fashioned one of the first new empirical essays in general realist theory in recent years and deserves to be commended. His approach will be the focus of debate and analysis for some time to come.


2017 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles H. Anderton

The bargaining theory of war and peace has emerged as an important research framework in the social sciences for understanding why wars occur and why opportunities for peace sometimes fail. Close to a dozen distinct “rationalist” sources of war have been theoretically modeled in the bargaining literature, empirical studies of war and peace are increasingly drawing upon bargaining models for theoretical guidance, and “nonrationalist” sources of war based on insights from psychology and sociology can be incorporated into the theory. This article briefly surveys key elements and results of the bargaining theory of war and it emphasizes the untapped potential for the framework to serve as a theory of peace in both research and teaching.


2021 ◽  
pp. 249-275
Author(s):  
Hryhorii Perepelytsia

In the presented article the author asks how the essence of the relationship between such states of international relations as war and peace has changed under the influence of the trends of the XXI century. A clear empirical example for such an analysis was the modern Russian-Ukrainian war, a manifestation of which we see on the Donbass. This war was largely the result and manifestation of these new trends in international relations at both the regional and global levels. First of all, these trends and their destructive consequences are typical for the security sphere. From so the dilemma of war and peace takes on a new dimension and becomes one of the most pressing problems of the theory of war and peace and the theory of international relations. The purpose of this article is to understand how the essence of the relationship between such states of international relations as war and peace has changed under the influence of the 21st century trends. In order to properly investigate this problem, was chosen as an object, a striking manifestation of which we see on the Donbass. Research questions relate to changing approaches to understanding the dilemma of war and peace and the nature of the relationship between these states of international relations under the influence of the 21st century trends. To address this research challenge, a systematic review of contemporary research on various aspects of war and peace has been carried out. The answers are based on a study of the criteria for determining the state of war and peace and the determinants that influence the dynamics of change in these states. The study used deductive methods, comparative, political and conflict analysis, as well as neo-realistic and neoliberal approaches to treating the dilemma of war and peace. The article based on the assumption that the modern Russo-Ukrainian war became a consequence and manifestation of these new trends in international relations both at the regional and global levels. The conclusions drawn from this study require a conceptual rethinking and a new reading of the dilemma of war and peace, which are becoming hybrid. Therefore, understanding the new quality of these hybrid forms of war and peace is a very important and necessary task. To solve it, it is necessary to determine how the parameters of the relationship between peace and war have changed. Empirical observations show that one of the new features of this relationship is the blurring of the boundaries of war and peace. The objectives of the study are based on the discovery of a new content of the categories of war and peace and their interdependence due to the influence of 21st century trends in the modern system of international relations. The results of the study are based on the analysis of modern research on various aspects of the war and peace, as well as empirical data on the course of the Russian-Ukrainian war. This article provides an overview of current research on various aspects of war and peace, identifies the interrelationships, interdependencies, and boundaries between hybrid warfare and hybrid peace. The author tried to define the criteria for such a distinction between war and peace, based on the neoliberal and neorealist theory of international relations. The scientific novelty of this publication is that the author clarified the methodological reasons for the unresolved dilemma of war and peace in the current trends of the 21st century. The article concludes with a forecast of the consequences of the unresolved dilemma of war and peace for national and international security. Recommendations are given for a possible solution to the problem of war and peace on Donbass. The research presented in this article is an attempt to conceptually rethink and re-read the dilemmas of war and peace that are becoming hybrid. The article greatly expands the understanding of how the parameters of the relationship between peace and war have changed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document