论文部分内容阅读
本文实际上是一篇论述国际关系研究方法论的文章,前半部评述了美国在国际关系研究这个领域中几种主要理论性研究,即方法论:(1)以莫根索为代表的“现实主义”理论,这一理论的总关键是根据“权力”一词解释的利益观念。(2)“体系论”,即从一个中心概念或从一些互相关联的中心概念出发,从而提出正确的问题和系统地去分析事实资料,然后通过系统的观察和严密的实验,归纳出一套足以驳斥谬论和证明真理的细密规律和命题;最近在这方面的研究有:里斯卡的“平衡论”和斯奈德的“现象论”。在文章的后半部,作者提出了自己的方法论建议。他所根据的假定是:(1)相对论和多元论的结合;(2)从别的学科借用研究工具,只限于那些能使用在有关国际关系的因素和单位方面;(3)不把“纯科学”理论和“规范论”(即“价值论”)作严格的区分。他建议作两种有系统的研究:首先要研究过去,主要是采用经验的方法;其次是瞻望将来,偏重于规范的方法。
This article is actually an essay on the methodology of international relations research. The first half reviews several major theoretical studies of the United States in the field of international relations research, that is, methodology: (1) “Realism” represented by Morganso Theory, the key to this theory is the notion of interest based on the term “power.” (2) “System Theory”, that is, starting from a central concept or from some interrelated central concepts, so as to raise correct questions and systematically analyze factual data. Then, through systematic observation and rigorous experiments, a set of Enough to refute fallacies and to prove the truth of the fine rules and propositions; recent research in this area: the “balance theory” of Risca and Snyder's “theory of phenomena.” In the second half of the article, the author put forward his own methodological proposals. The assumptions on which he is based are: (1) the combination of theory of relativity and pluralism; (2) the borrowing of research tools from other disciplines, limited to those factors and units that can be used in relation to international relations; (3) There is a strict distinction between theory and “normative theory” (ie “value theory”). He suggested two systematic studies: first, to study the past, mainly the method of experience; secondly, to look forward to the future, emphasis on normative methods.