国际关系学中的中国学派构建 （笔谈）
The Construction of the Chinese School of International Relations (conversation by writing)
-
摘要: 任晓梳理了共生理论在国内的发展历程和论争过程，认为其具有共同的核心概念、学术旨趣，显示出学术流派的成长。同时，共生理论也引起国际学界的注意。季玲认为，关系主义研究转向实体主义思维方式，以关系主义思维开展全球国际关系知识生产的新形态已经出现。实体主义认识论是以实体作为分析的基本单位，并从二元对立的范畴中寻找线性的因果关系。关系主义认识论则通过发展各种概念和方法超越二元对立。中国传统文化中的“中庸”“辩证”等内容为全球关系研究提供重要资源，全球关系主义研究在不同关系主义传统的影响下更加多元。彭成义基于库恩范式革命的视角，认为当前中国国际关系理论进入常规研究和范式转换齐头并进的阶段，不仅有西方国际关系主流理论范式研究的成果，也有对中国学派的探索。鲁鹏以ISA2023年年会为例，从整体和具体分支两方面介绍西方学者中国对学派的反馈：前者包括从中国学派分支来理解其整体，缺乏对中国学派的目标、可行性等内容的整体把握；后者在肯定关系理论的学术贡献基础上，也对其两种自我定位的不一致性和对关系网描述与对国际秩序构想之间不匹配进行批评。中国学派也对此进行了回应，使得此次年会成为双方平等与建设性的对话。Abstract: Ren Xiao combs through the development history and controversy process of symbiosis theory in China, and believes that it has common core concepts, academic interests, and shows the growth of academic schools. Meanwhile, symbiosis theory has also attracted the attention of the international academic community. According to Ji Ling, relationalist research has shifted to an entityist way of thinking, and a new form of global international relations knowledge production with relationalist thinking has emerged. Entityist epistemology takes entities as the basic unit of analysis and looks for linear causality from the categories of dichotomies. Relationalist epistemology, on the other hand, transcends dichotomies through the development of various concepts and methods. The ‘middle ground’ and ‘dialectic’ in traditional Chinese culture provide important resources for global relational studies, which have become more diversified under the influence of different relationalist traditions. Based on the perspective of Kuhn's paradigm revolution, Peng Chengyi argues that the current Chinese international relations theory has entered a stage where conventional research and paradigm shift go hand in hand, and that there are not only the results of the mainstream theoretical paradigm research on western international relations, but also the exploration of the Chinese school of thought. Taking the ISA2023 Annual Conference as an example, Lu Peng introduces Western scholars' Chinese feedback on the school in terms of both the whole and specific branches: the former includes understanding the Chinese school as a whole in terms of its branches, and lacks a holistic grasp of the Chinese school's goals, feasibility, and other elements; the latter, on the basis of its affirmation of the academic contributions of the theory of relations, is also critical of the inconsistency between its two self-positions and the mismatch between its description of the network of relations and its conception of the international order. The latter, while affirming the academic contributions of the theory of relations, also criticised the inconsistency between its two self-orientations and the mismatch between its description of the network of relations and its conception of international order. The Chinese school responded to these criticisms, making the conference an equal and constructive dialogue between the two sides.
-
Key words:
-
点击查看大图
计量
- 文章访问数: 3372
- HTML全文浏览量: 742
下载:
沪公网安备 31010102003103号