国際理論研究におけるパワー概念の「アメリカ的受容」(1) : 先行研究との対話
スポンサーリンク
概要
- 論文の詳細を見る
The purpose of this and forthcoming papers is to illustrate the peculiarity of the American acceptance of power concept in the study of international theory. Based upon my recent researches, I have proposed an interpretation that the concept of power in the American international study has been awakened and accepted in the interwar period, especially from the late 1930s to the early 1940s. Then, it will be useful to start with terminology. The term "awakening of power concept" can be appropriately described as a self-consciousness of political-drive, while the term "acceptance of power concept" can be defined as individual scholars' insinuation of this concept into their intellectual activity. Although a large number of researches has so far been carried out into the theoretical aspect of American foreign relations, very little speculation has been made about the question of American acceptance of power concept. This state of affairs has been overlooked by subsequent scholars. The concept of power is diverse and rather mysterious. So many men, so many minds. In this and forthcoming papers, I will use the word power not in a narrow sense of military or coercive one, but in a neutral sense, which covers a notion of persuation as well on the grounds that power can not be defined easily without reference to its contextual connotations. Especially in this paper, I will present my point of view, and make intellectual conversations with the previous studies with a special reference to the noteworthiness of power concept. The first question to be discussed is about an academic accumulation in the study of international theory. That is, we should pay more attention to the continuity of interwar and post-World War periods in the viewpoint of power concept. It will be useful to keep this point in mind as we examine a new tendency of the times. History never fails to give us some kind of suggestions. The second is a dichotomy between idealism and realism. We must look more carefully into the spectrum of debates from the pole of idealism to the pole of realism in the light of power-level as Arnold Wolfers has already argued. The third is an academic impact from other social sciences upon international theory. In my own view, power has so far been a common term in social sciences since its emergence. It seems to me that more attention should be directed to the interdisciplinary character of internatiol theory in the early period. The fourth is a philosophical background of Amecican acceptance of power concept. The important character to be pointed out is a philosophical divergence between American scholars and European refugee scholars as well as its convergence. A feeling of rivalry between them is rephrased as American liberalism vs. European conservatism. It is particularly important to understand the philosophical background of political debates. Therefore, in so doing, a further direction of this study will be the one in which the meanings of American acceptance of power concept in the study of international theory and their implications are brought into relief.
- 島根県立大学の論文
- 2001-03-31
著者
関連論文
- 国際理論研究におけるパワー概念の「アメリカ的受容」(4) : その意義(真柄欽次教授山田政美教授大野浩教授松岡紘一教授ロード・バーナード教授退職記年号)
- スプラウトにおける対外政策研究の再検討の試み(2) : パワー概念の覚醒と受容の観点から
- スプラウトにおける対外政策研究の再検討の試み(1) : その国際政治学の理論体系に注目して(第I部 北東アジアの国際関係)
- 国際理論研究におけるパワー概念の「アメリカ的受容」(3) : パワー論争の多元化と収斂(浅野雅巳教授・鈴木登教授御退職記念号)
- 総合政策学的アプローチの可能性 : 地域の安全保障をめぐって(総合政策学)
- 国際理論研究におけるパワー概念の「アメリカ的受容」(2) : パワー論をめぐる7潮流
- 国際理論研究におけるパワー概念の「アメリカ的受容」(1) : 先行研究との対話