Pufendorf and Leibniz on duties of esteem in diplomatic relations

IF 1.1 Q3 POLITICAL SCIENCE Journal of International Political Theory Pub Date : 2021-03-18 DOI:10.1177/17550882211002225
A. Blank
{"title":"Pufendorf and Leibniz on duties of esteem in diplomatic relations","authors":"A. Blank","doi":"10.1177/17550882211002225","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The striving for self-worth is recognized as a driving force in international relations; but if self-worth is understood as a function of status in a power hierarchy, this striving often is a source of anxiety and conflict over status. The quasi-international relations within the early modern German Empire have prompted seventeenth-century natural law theorists such as Samuel Pufendorf and Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz to reflect about this problem. In his De statu imperii Germanici (1667), Pufendorf regards the power differences and dependencies between the Reichsstände to be an expression of the deficits of constitutional structure of the Empire—a structure that, in his view, causes internal division because it leads to distorted practices of esteem between the estates. Against Pufendorf, Leibniz argues De jure suprematus ac legationis (1671) that political actors such as the German princes who are not Electors could fulfill functions under the law of nations such as forming confederations and peace keeping. Incoherently, however, Leibniz excludes less powerful estates such as the Imperial cities and the Hanseatic cities from the ensuing duties of esteem. This shortcoming, in turn, is arguably remedied in Pufendorf’s later considerations concerning duties of esteem in diplomatic relations.","PeriodicalId":44237,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Political Theory","volume":"18 1","pages":"186 - 204"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/17550882211002225","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of International Political Theory","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17550882211002225","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

The striving for self-worth is recognized as a driving force in international relations; but if self-worth is understood as a function of status in a power hierarchy, this striving often is a source of anxiety and conflict over status. The quasi-international relations within the early modern German Empire have prompted seventeenth-century natural law theorists such as Samuel Pufendorf and Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz to reflect about this problem. In his De statu imperii Germanici (1667), Pufendorf regards the power differences and dependencies between the Reichsstände to be an expression of the deficits of constitutional structure of the Empire—a structure that, in his view, causes internal division because it leads to distorted practices of esteem between the estates. Against Pufendorf, Leibniz argues De jure suprematus ac legationis (1671) that political actors such as the German princes who are not Electors could fulfill functions under the law of nations such as forming confederations and peace keeping. Incoherently, however, Leibniz excludes less powerful estates such as the Imperial cities and the Hanseatic cities from the ensuing duties of esteem. This shortcoming, in turn, is arguably remedied in Pufendorf’s later considerations concerning duties of esteem in diplomatic relations.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
普芬多夫与莱布尼茨谈外交关系中的尊重义务
追求自我价值被公认为国际关系的推动力;但是,如果自我价值被理解为权力等级制度中地位的函数,那么这种努力往往是对地位的焦虑和冲突的根源。近代德意志帝国早期的准国际关系促使17世纪的自然法理论家如塞缪尔·普芬多夫和戈特弗里德·威廉·莱布尼茨对这一问题进行了反思。普芬多夫在其《德意志帝国地位》(1667)中认为,帝国之间的权力差异和依赖关系是帝国宪法结构缺陷的表现——在他看来,这种结构会导致内部分裂,因为它会导致庄园之间扭曲的尊重做法。反对普芬多夫,莱布尼茨认为,法律至上主义者(1671年)认为,政治行为者,如非选帝侯的德国王子,可以履行国家法律规定的职能,如组建邦联和维持和平。然而,莱布尼茨语无伦次地将帝国城市和汉萨城市等实力较弱的庄园排除在随后的尊重义务之外。反过来,普芬多夫后来对外交关系中尊重义务的考虑可以弥补这一缺陷。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
10.00%
发文量
11
期刊最新文献
Arguing and bargaining in international forums: The need for a novel approach The peace/violence nexus: Fundamental, multiple, contingent Dialectical Insights for Global IR: Forum on Snapshots from Home Buddhism, quantum theory and international relations: On the strength of the subject, the discontinuous relationality, and the world of contingency The Role of Actionless Action in Generating Quantum Social Change: Forum on Snapshots from Home
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1