理性主义与现实主义国际关系理论中的“理性行动者假设”

IF 1.1 Q3 POLITICAL SCIENCE Journal of International Political Theory Pub Date : 2023-01-16 DOI:10.1177/17550882221144643
B. Schmidt, C. Wight
{"title":"理性主义与现实主义国际关系理论中的“理性行动者假设”","authors":"B. Schmidt, C. Wight","doi":"10.1177/17550882221144643","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The commitment to the rational actor model of state behavior is said to be a core assumption of realist theory. This assumption is listed in most textbook accounts of realism. Yet is rationality a core supposition of realist theory, and if so, what kind of rationality is implied in these claims? Debate on the relationship between realism, and what is often labeled as rationality is replete with misunderstandings. Authors deploy terms such as rationality, rationalism, and rational actor in diverse and contradictory ways. This article aims to cut through this confusion and provide an account of the different ways in which these terms are used in the field of International Relations (IR). We argue that much of the confusion surrounding rationalism/rationality in IR arises due to a failure to distinguish between rationalism as an epistemological position (the observer rationality assumption) and rationality as an ontological position (the rational actor assumption). We use this distinction to examine carefully the relationship between the concepts of rationalism/rationality in realist theory.","PeriodicalId":44237,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Political Theory","volume":"19 1","pages":"158 - 182"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rationalism and the “rational actor assumption” in realist international relations theory\",\"authors\":\"B. Schmidt, C. Wight\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/17550882221144643\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The commitment to the rational actor model of state behavior is said to be a core assumption of realist theory. This assumption is listed in most textbook accounts of realism. Yet is rationality a core supposition of realist theory, and if so, what kind of rationality is implied in these claims? Debate on the relationship between realism, and what is often labeled as rationality is replete with misunderstandings. Authors deploy terms such as rationality, rationalism, and rational actor in diverse and contradictory ways. This article aims to cut through this confusion and provide an account of the different ways in which these terms are used in the field of International Relations (IR). We argue that much of the confusion surrounding rationalism/rationality in IR arises due to a failure to distinguish between rationalism as an epistemological position (the observer rationality assumption) and rationality as an ontological position (the rational actor assumption). We use this distinction to examine carefully the relationship between the concepts of rationalism/rationality in realist theory.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44237,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of International Political Theory\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"158 - 182\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of International Political Theory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/17550882221144643\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of International Political Theory","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17550882221144643","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: 1

摘要

对国家行为的理性行为者模型的承诺被认为是现实主义理论的一个核心假设。这一假设在大多数关于现实主义的教科书中都有列出。然而,理性是现实主义理论的核心假设吗?如果是,在这些主张中隐含着什么样的理性?关于现实主义和理性之间关系的争论充满了误解。作者们以不同而矛盾的方式使用理性、理性主义和理性行为者等术语。本文旨在打破这种混乱,并提供这些术语在国际关系领域使用的不同方式的说明。我们认为,国际关系中围绕理性主义/理性的许多混淆是由于未能区分作为认识论立场的理性主义(观察者理性假设)和作为本体论立场的理性(理性行为者假设)。我们利用这一区别来仔细考察现实主义理论中理性主义/理性概念之间的关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Rationalism and the “rational actor assumption” in realist international relations theory
The commitment to the rational actor model of state behavior is said to be a core assumption of realist theory. This assumption is listed in most textbook accounts of realism. Yet is rationality a core supposition of realist theory, and if so, what kind of rationality is implied in these claims? Debate on the relationship between realism, and what is often labeled as rationality is replete with misunderstandings. Authors deploy terms such as rationality, rationalism, and rational actor in diverse and contradictory ways. This article aims to cut through this confusion and provide an account of the different ways in which these terms are used in the field of International Relations (IR). We argue that much of the confusion surrounding rationalism/rationality in IR arises due to a failure to distinguish between rationalism as an epistemological position (the observer rationality assumption) and rationality as an ontological position (the rational actor assumption). We use this distinction to examine carefully the relationship between the concepts of rationalism/rationality in realist theory.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 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