代写范文

留学资讯

写作技巧

论文代写专题

服务承诺

资金托管
原创保证
实力保障
24小时客服
使命必达

51Due提供Essay,Paper,Report,Assignment等学科作业的代写与辅导,同时涵盖Personal Statement,转学申请等留学文书代写。

51Due将让你达成学业目标
51Due将让你达成学业目标
51Due将让你达成学业目标
51Due将让你达成学业目标

私人订制你的未来职场 世界名企,高端行业岗位等 在新的起点上实现更高水平的发展

积累工作经验
多元化文化交流
专业实操技能
建立人际资源圈

The English school

2019-04-09 来源: 51due教员组 类别: 更多范文

下面为大家整理一篇优秀的assignment代写范文- The English school,供大家参考学习,这篇论文讨论了英国学派。英国学派是一个不同于美国主流学派的国际关系理论流派,它有独特的方法论和理论视野,其本体论的多元主义是与他们主张的方法论多元主义紧密相关的,因此,把握英国学派的方法论立场是理解其本体论多元主义的关键所在。英国学派采取多元主义方法论立场的结果,使他们能将国际体系、国际社会和世界社会的理论主张结合起来,对国际关系进行多层次、多维度的考察。不过,英国学派方法论的多元主义也造成了其理论的内在矛盾和紧张。

English school,英国学派,assignment代写,paper代写,北美作业代写

English school is a different from the mainstream school of international relations theories, it has a unique methodology and theory field of vision, the pluralism of its ontology is closely related to they advocate methodological pluralism, therefore, to grasp the methodology of the English school position is the key to understand its ontological pluralism. The result of the methodology of pluralism adopted by the British school enables them to combine the theories and propositions of the international system, the international community and the world society, and conduct a multi-level and multi-dimensional investigation of international relations. The pluralist methodology of the British school not only provides a consistent framework for the synthesis of various theories of international relations and their viewpoints, but also sets up an ideal platform for the dialogue between them. However, the pluralism of methodology of the British school also caused its internal contradiction and tension.

The British school is a theoretical school of international relations which has been paid more and more attention in recent years. In the international social theory of the British school, the international system, the international community and the world community are three key concepts, among which the international community is the core concept of its theory and the central issue of concern. In fact, the Pluralism of the British school is closely related to the methodology Pluralism they advocate. English school's point of view in the international system, international society and world society as the foundation, methodological differences between these three have roughly correspond to when Martin white about the thought of the three traditional international relations, namely the socialist realism, rationalism and revolution, these minds and concepts to reflect the international politics often coexist and interact and influence of the three important factors. Therefore, to understand the international community theory of the British school, grasp its methodology is the key to the problem. This paper is intended to make some necessary discussions on the methodology standpoint held by the British school and its relationship and significance with ontology.

Any theory is guided by a methodology. In the past forty years, the discipline of international relations has been under the influence of positivist methodology. Positivism believes that natural science and social science are unified, objective facts exist independently of people's subjective values, and there are objective laws in the social world as well as in the natural world. The methodology of natural science can be used to explain the social world. However, as a philosophy and methodology for studying humans and their relations, positivism is fatally flawed: it cannot provide, or even possibly answer, normative questions in international relations. Since the 1980s, the mainstream positivism theory in international relations has been questioned and criticized by the post-positivism such as critical theory, feminism and postmodernism. After the positivism in spite of all kinds of differences between schools, but they have one thing in common, denial of positivism about the unity of natural science and social science assumes that the rationality of the thought on the research of the social world, unable to distinguish between objective and subjective value cannot separate research subjects and research objects, emphasizes the theoretical interpretation of sex, behavior and structure of the importance of meaning between mutual construction and subjects. The debate between positivism and post-positivism involves the methodology of international relations.

Martin Hollis and Steve Smith believes that international relations research, there are two basic way of thinking: one is scientific method, tries to explain the phenomenon of nature science, it with scientific method as the basis of explanation, pursue the united several themes, explore the reasons for understanding human behavior, and found in certain circumstances govern the law of the people or the collective behavior; The other is the hermeneutic approach, which is derived from historical research and people's efforts to seek the meaning of phenomena. It seeks to understand the meaning of events and the parties' views on the situation by focusing on the internal events. These two methods, based on causal interpretation and hermeneutic understanding respectively, have changed the development of social science, especially the development of international relations research and international relations theory. The method of interpretation is usually consistent with the positivist method of international relations theory, while the method of understanding is consistent with postmodernism.

In the works of the British school, although the essence and meaning of methodology are not clearly stated, but in fact they have a clear methodological guidance. In the mid-1960s, in a famous paper attacking behaviorism, headley and bull clearly expressed the basic attitudes and propositions of the British school on methodological issues. He believed that there are two methods of international relations theory: one is the classical method, the other is the scientific method. The classical method is "a theoretical method derived from philosophy, history and jurisprudence, which is characterized by explicit reliance on judgment". The scientific method, on the other hand, maintains that theory must be "based on logical or mathematical confirmation and verifiable, rigorous, empirical procedures." Bull emphasized that the British school always adhered to the classic method of studying international relations, that is, the method of humanities, and believed that "international relations would be meaningless if we strictly followed the standard of verification and verification". He criticized the scientific method for being divorced from the complexity of human history, ignoring the limitation of human cognitive ability, and lacking the self-doubt of researchers, making it almost impossible to make any contribution to international relations. In the scholars point of view, international relations as a special field of human social relations, is in the history of the development of time and space, it has the special language, norms and values, such as power and law, order and justice, sovereignty and human rights, etc., many important problems in international relations from different people's values. Therefore, the study of international relations can't be like natural science through illustrate rule or by law predict human behavior in advance, to use the scientific method cannot interpret the normative field involving a lot of human moral and ethical issues, and only take method of interpretation of the humanities, to the social world of international relations in the specific time and space of press close to, understand when actors take statecraft often face conflicting political values and goals, explain the thoughts and actions of the international relations practitioners. In terms of methodology, the British school rejected behaviorism and insisted on traditional humanistic methods, but it was wrong to absolutely oppose positivism. In fact, the British school does not object to the scientific nature of the study of international relations, nor does it object to the search for historical patterns and laws, but to the tendency of scientism in the study of international relations. In their view, "if one tries to limit the study of international relations to a rigorous science, that effort is harmful in the sense that it requires logical or mathematical reasoning or rigorous empirical procedures." According to bull, the theory of international relations should undoubtedly be scientific in the sense that it is logically coherent, precise and systematic, and needs to conform to the philosophical foundations of modern science. Boolean admits some theorists of behaviorism important contributions to the institute of international relations, think the value of the scientific method can make up for some disadvantages of the classic methods but he also serves as a reminder that the international relations theory in addition to the scientific method and classical method, certainly, there are many other methods, take the science and classical dichotomy, actually covers must consider many other features. Martin white also pointed out that international politics is a field of recurring events, in which political behaviors are mostly regular. Visible, although the British school of thought advocated by classical method of study of international relations, but they are not opposed to the scientific method or other methods, the comprehensive research on the works of the English school to show that they actually rely on positivism, Lenneneutics and critical theory assumption, that is to say, they adopted a methodological pluralism standpoint.

In English school point of view, the activities of the international arena is complex and uncertain, there are both conflicts and cooperation between countries, the activities of both countries, there are individuals, multinational companies, the activities of non-governmental organizations, these different factors in the international community are exist at the same time, they are unlikely to simplify and abstract to emphasize only one single theory of explanatory variables, otherwise it will cause the simplistic understanding of world politics, even distort reality. A comprehensive understanding of international relations requires a holistic and comprehensive study of the problems and dilemmas that arise in these complex situations. This kind of methodology standpoint has the obvious embodiment in the classic works of the British school. Pregnant, in the international theory: three traditional international relations theory approach should be clear claims realism, rationalism and the revolutionary main righteousness dialogue between three traditional emphasis on the elements of the three traditional in international relations are exist at the same time, to be attributed to recognize international relations only by seeking the argument between traditional thought hard to understand. He thinks that although these traditional in thinking is unique and the inner coherent, but in practice they are not mutually exclusive, but sometimes intertwined together, "three traditional parallel tracks is not like three path to the destination, but with the vortex and reverse flow of streams, sometimes intertwined and never fixed in their own bed for a long time, they seem to cord, the tapestry of western civilization is always changing and intertwined". In anarchic society, Boer makes a more clear exposition of this methodological position.

Boolean believes that the international community is in the modern international political work, one of the three basic elements in the world political arena, in addition to the international community the elements, at the same time there are also two other competing elements, namely the war elements and transnational solidarity or conflict, as a result, "the international community as the only or dominant in international political factors, from the Angle of view to explain the international events, affirmation is wrong". "The elements of the international community are undoubtedly real, but the state of war and transnational solidarity and conflict are also objective facts. This methodological stance captures the characteristics of the different elements that function simultaneously on the international stage, particularly the anarchic international system, the rule-governed international community and the transnational world community. From the standpoint of methodology, Boolean believes that there is no need to make the international system, international social embodiment of these three elements, and the world society because they form a part of the larger and more complex reality, when prominent characteristics associated with the international community, it can't be at the expense of anarchy features of associated with the international system and in the world society with multinational force at the expense of the importance of recognition, although they will differ in strength, but these three elements are exist at the same time, just for the convenience of methodology to describe the important elements of international relations were divided artificially. It can be seen that the British school put methodological considerations above the division of these elements. With this in mind, they examine the international system, the international community and the world community at different levels of analysis.

According to the scholars of the British school, the study of the international system, the international community and the world community needs to take completely different forms. In the international system, countries do not necessarily need to recognize that they are members of the system when interacting with each other, and the interaction between countries can be described through external observation. Therefore, the international system can be analyzed with the positivist method. But in the international community, countries must be aware that they have a common identity, that is to say, the international community on the assumption that there is a body between the leaders, the agreement between the formation of the understanding of the international community requires researchers across time and space differences, into other people's inner spiritual world, can only be achieved as a result, the international community can only take the method of analysis. In the world society, people must realize the common goal or value of the whole human society, that is, the concept of the common good in the world, which requires people to go beyond the limitations of traditional methodology and to be liberated from the current restricted and dominated relationship and distorted communication and understanding. Therefore, we can only adopt critical theory to analyze the world society.

In short, the approach of the British school has always been characterized by pluralism. This methodological stance has laid a foundation for them to discuss a wide range of research topics in ontology, and enabled them to combine different theories and propositions, showing three complete pictures of the international system, the international community and the world community with their own characteristics and interconnections.

51due留学教育原创版权郑重声明:原创assignment代写范文源自编辑创作,未经官方许可,网站谢绝转载。对于侵权行为,未经同意的情况下,51Due有权追究法律责任。主要业务有assignment代写、essay代写、paper代写服务。

51due为留学生提供最好的assignment代写服务,亲们可以进入主页了解和获取更多assignment代写范文 提供北美作业代写服务,详情可以咨询我们的客服QQ:800020041。

上一篇:American homeschooling 下一篇:The laws governing preschool e