scholarly journals Principle of economy of language and the question of anthropomorphism of state

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (34) ◽  
pp. 125-139
Author(s):  
Mateusz Filary-Szczepanik

RESEARCH OBJECTIVE: The aim of the paper is twofold: (1) polemics with Alexander Wendt’s thesis that state is a person and (2) innovative approach to the problem of anthropomorphism of state in general theories of International Relations. THE RESEARCH PROBLEM AND METHODS: How is anthropomor‑ phism of the state present in the language of grand theories of IR? How the language as a system shapes the phenomenon of anthropomorphism of the state in those?”. Research methods: qualitative content analysis and close reading research technique. THE PROCESS OF ARGUMENTATION: Using these research method and techniques, the author analyses theories of Hans Morgenthau, Raymond Aron, Headley Bull, Morton Kaplan, and Kenneth Waltz seeking the presence of anthropomorphism as a feature of their language. He summarises his find‑ ings that enable him to critically engage with Alexander Wendt’s thesis, hence fulfilling the scientific objective of the paper. RESEARCH RESULTS: On the basis of the conducted research, the anthro‑ pomorphism of state is a fact of language of the analysed theories. CONCLUSIONS, INNOVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The author problematizes Alexander Wendt’s thesis that state is a person by pointing out that anthropomorphism of state is not predicated upon the ontological reality of state as person, but on the linguistic rule that language seeks the economy of utterances. Pointing out to this fact is novel, since the literature referred in the article largely omits it. It is an important contribution for all the scholars for whom the problem of the state is a major research interest.

Author(s):  
David Boucher

The classic foundational status that Hobbes has been afforded by contemporary international relations theorists is largely the work of Hans Morgenthau, Martin Wight, and Hedley Bull. They were not unaware that they were to some extent creating a convenient fiction, an emblematic realist, a shorthand for all of the features encapsulated in the term. The detachment of international law from the law of nature by nineteenth-century positivists opened Hobbes up, even among international jurists, to be portrayed as almost exclusively a mechanistic theorist of absolute state sovereignty. If we are to endow him with a foundational place at all it is not because he was an uncompromising realist equating might with right, on the analogy of the state of nature, but instead to his complete identification of natural law with the law of nations. It was simply a matter of subject that distinguished them, the individual and the state.


1987 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 189-210 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roger D. Spegele

In the recent study of international relations, political realism has, apparently, had as many supporters as detractors. Nonetheless, there seems to be a growing tendency to treat the categories of political realism as if they were passing the way of all flesh, destined to be replaced by system theory, transnationalism, Marxist structuralism, critical theory or whatever. One difficulty with this judgement is that political realism is not a single theoretical entity which can be refuted by single disconfirming instances. Nor is it an understanding of the subject rooted in the views of such well-known exponents of this school as Hans Morgenthau, Kenneth Thompson, Martin Wight, Sir Herbert Butterfield, E. H. Carr or Raymond Aron. On the contrary, political realism is a conception of politics which stretches back to the great Indian thinker Kautilya and in fact constitutes a many-mansioned tradition of thought about international relations. Three aspects of that tradition are examined in this essay: Common-sense Realism, Concessional Realism and neo-Aristotelian Realism. These reflections are only very tangentially related to the debates in the 1950s and 1960s concerning realism. This essay focuses, rather, on certain neglected features of contrasting philosophies of science. The article concludes, somewhat tentatively, that neo-Aristotelian Realism is coherent and cogent and superior in important respects to what scientific empiricism has to offer.


Author(s):  
Martin Wight

This book collects Martin Wight’s works on the theory and philosophy of international politics. It includes classic works, such as “Why Is There No International Theory?” and “Western Values in International Relations,” as well as previously unpublished works such as “The Communist Theory of International Relations” and “Gain, Fear and Glory: Reflections on the Nature of International Politics.” These works encompass four categories: (a) traditions of thinking about international politics since the sixteenth century, (b) the causes and functions of war, (c) international and regime legitimacy, and (d) fortune and irony in international politics. Wight identifies and analyzes three major traditions of thinking about international politics in the West since the sixteenth century: Realism, Rationalism, and Revolutionism, also known as the Machiavellian, Grotian, and Kantian approaches. Wight examines the causes of war highlighted by Thucydides and Hobbes (material interest, fear, and reputation), and considers the functions of war in international politics (such as winning and retaining national independence and upholding the balance of power). Wight reviews the history of dynastic and popular legitimacy as well as post-1945 concepts of international and domestic legitimacy. Finally, Wight considers fortune and irony, including the decision-maker’s frequent rediscovery of the recalcitrance of events. Unintended, unexpected, and ironical consequences abound in international politics. This volume also features eight book reviews by Wight, including his assessments of works by Raymond Aron, E. H. Carr, Friedrich Meinecke, and Hans Morgenthau.


Author(s):  
Salah Hassan Mohammed ◽  
Mahaa Ahmed Al-Mawla

The Study is based on the state as one of the main pillars in international politics. In additions, it tackles its position in the international order from the major schools perspectives in international relations, Especially, these schools differ in the status and priorities of the state according to its priorities, also, each scholar has a different point of view. The research is dedicated to providing a future vision of the state's position in the international order in which based on the vision of the major schools in international relations.


2009 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 175-193 ◽  
Author(s):  
ANTJE WIENER

AbstractThis article proposes a framework for empirical research on contested meaning of norms in international politics. The goal is to identify a design for empirical research to examine associative connotations of norms that come to the fore when norms are contested in situations of governance beyond-the-state and especially in crises. If cultural practices shape experience and expectations, they need to be identified and made ‘account-able’ based on empirical research. To that end, the proposed qualitative approach centres on individually enacted meaning-in-use. The framework comprises norm-types, conditions of contestation, types of divergence and opposition-deriving as a specific interview evaluation technique. Section one situates the problem of contestation in the field of constructivist research on norms. Section two introduces distinctive conditions of contestation and types of norms. Section three details the methodology of conducting and evaluating interviews and presents the technique of opposition-deriving with a view to reconstructing the structure of meaning-in-use. Section four concludes with an outlook to follow-up research.


2007 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-54
Author(s):  
Antonio P. Contreras

This paper inquires into the implications of the different discursive imaginations on civil societies and the state from the perspective of the social sciences, particularly political science and international relations. It focuses on some interfaces and tensions that exist between civil society on one hand, and the state and its bureaucratic instrumentalities on the other, particularly in the domain of environment and natural resources governance in the context of new regionalisms and of alternative concepts of human security. There is now a new context for regionalism in Southeast Asia, not only among state structures, such as the ASEAN and the various Mekong bodies, but also among local civil societies coming from the region. It is in this context that issues confronting local communities are given a new sphere for interaction, as well as a new platform for engaging state structures and processes. This paper illustrates how dynamic are the possibilities for non-state domains for transnational interactions, particularly in the context of the emerging environmental regionalism. This occurs despite the dominance of neo-realist political theorizing, and the state-centric nature of international interactions.


Author(s):  
Sean Fleming

States are commonly blamed for wars, called on to apologize, held liable for debts and reparations, bound by treaties, and punished with sanctions. But what does it mean to hold a state responsible as opposed to a government, a nation, or an individual leader? Under what circumstances should we assign responsibility to states rather than individuals? This book demystifies the phenomenon of state responsibility and explains why it is a challenging yet indispensable part of modern politics. Taking Thomas Hobbes' theory of the state as a starting point, the book presents a theory of state responsibility that sheds new light on sovereign debt, historical reparations, treaty obligations, and economic sanctions. Along the way, it overturns longstanding interpretations of Hobbes' political thought, explores how new technologies will alter the practice of state responsibility as we know it, and develops new accounts of political authority, representation, and legitimacy. The book argues that Hobbes' idea of the state offers a far richer and more realistic conception of state responsibility than the theories prevalent today and demonstrates that Hobbes' Leviathan is much more than an anthropomorphic “artificial man.” The book is essential reading for political theorists, scholars of international relations, international lawyers, and philosophers. It recovers a forgotten understanding of state personality in Hobbes' thought and shows how to apply it to the world of imperfect states in which we live.


Author(s):  
Marina Okladnaya ◽  
Vadym Ptytsia

Problem setting. Legal personality of Kyivan Rus’ is very complex issue, which contains elements such as contract law, law of war, ambassadorial law, general position of the state in the international relations sphere. The condition of Kyivan Rus’ in medieval history can be determined only after analyzing researches of well-known scientists, who had different opinions on this subject. In spite of the fact that a lot of researches were made on this topic, there is no clear and unambiguous answer to the question: “was Kyivan Rus’ independent and equal subject of international law?” In our opinion, this topic is actual even nowadays, because without an analysis of the issue it is impossible to form a modern understanding of Ukrainian statehood and its features in different periods. Analysis of recent researches and publications. Valuable contribution to the research of Kyivan Rus’ position in international relations sphere were made by lots of scientists in areas of Ukrainian history and history of international law such as O. Zadoroznyi, P. Tolochko, O. Butkevich, A. Dmitriev, Y. Dmitriev, M. Kotlyar, V. Pashuto, D. Feldman, V. Butkevich, I. Shekera, O. Pavlenko etc. Target of research is to analyze and compare opinions of different authors on the issue of determining Kyivan Rus’ as legal entity of international law. To achieve this target these tasks have to be solved: to research and analyze modern scientists’ studies about the position of Kyivan Rus’ in international law sphere in medieval period; to compare scientists’ views on legal personality of the state and come to a certain conclusion on this issue. Article’s main body. In this article author analyzes different periods of Kyivan Rus’ existence, general position of the state in international relations sphere and opinions of different scientists on this subject. Also, the article provides a comparison of scientists’ views on the topic of legal personality of international law of Kyivan Rus’. Conclusions. Kyivan state in different periods of its existence was in various international legal positions. Despite of the fact, that features of international law of Kyivan Rus’ is a topic for controversy, Ukrainian and foreign scientists came to the conclusion that Rus’ was full-fledged subject of international law and after its collapse it revived in the Principality of Galicia-Volhynia, Zaporozhian Sich and the Cossack Hetmanate, Ukrainian People’s Republic, UkSSR (as independent UN member) and modern independent Ukraine.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document