Conceptualising peace and its preconditions: The anti-Pelagian imagination and the critical turn in peace theory

IF 1.1 Q3 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Sophia Dingli
{"title":"Conceptualising peace and its preconditions: The anti-Pelagian imagination and the critical turn in peace theory","authors":"Sophia Dingli","doi":"10.1177/1755088220951592","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the conceptualisations of peace and its preconditions manifested in the critical turn in peace theory: bottom-up approaches which begin with particular contexts and postulate diverse local actors as integral to the process of peace-building. This article argues that the turn is at an impasse and is unable to address the crucial charge that its conceptualisation of peace is inconsistent. To explain the persistence of inconsistency and to move us forward, the article analyses, evaluates and responds to the turn through the lens of Nicholas Rengger’s work on the anti-Pelagian imagination in political theory. This is defined as a tendency to begin theorising from non-utopian, anti-perfectionist and sceptical assumptions. Through this examination the article argues that the critical turn is anti-Pelagian but not consistently so because it often gives way to perfectionism, adopts naïve readings of institutions and postulates demanding conceptions of political agency and practice. This inconsistency with its own philosophical premises makes the turn’s conceptualisation of peace and its preconditions incoherent. Finally, the article sketches an alternative account of peace which draws upon a number of anti-Pelagian scholars and mobilises Rengger’s particular defense of anti-Pelagianism. The suggested alternative, the article argues, provides us with a more coherent theory of peace and a way out of existing dead ends.","PeriodicalId":44237,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Political Theory","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1755088220951592","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of International Political Theory","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1755088220951592","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: 2

Abstract

This article examines the conceptualisations of peace and its preconditions manifested in the critical turn in peace theory: bottom-up approaches which begin with particular contexts and postulate diverse local actors as integral to the process of peace-building. This article argues that the turn is at an impasse and is unable to address the crucial charge that its conceptualisation of peace is inconsistent. To explain the persistence of inconsistency and to move us forward, the article analyses, evaluates and responds to the turn through the lens of Nicholas Rengger’s work on the anti-Pelagian imagination in political theory. This is defined as a tendency to begin theorising from non-utopian, anti-perfectionist and sceptical assumptions. Through this examination the article argues that the critical turn is anti-Pelagian but not consistently so because it often gives way to perfectionism, adopts naïve readings of institutions and postulates demanding conceptions of political agency and practice. This inconsistency with its own philosophical premises makes the turn’s conceptualisation of peace and its preconditions incoherent. Finally, the article sketches an alternative account of peace which draws upon a number of anti-Pelagian scholars and mobilises Rengger’s particular defense of anti-Pelagianism. The suggested alternative, the article argues, provides us with a more coherent theory of peace and a way out of existing dead ends.
和平及其先决条件的概念化:反伯拉纠想象与和平理论的批判转向
本文探讨了和平的概念及其先决条件,这些先决条件体现在和平理论的关键转变中:自下而上的方法,从特定的背景开始,并假定不同的地方行为者是建设和平进程的组成部分。这篇文章认为,这一转变陷入僵局,无法解决其和平概念不一致的关键指控。为了解释不一致性的持续存在,并推动我们前进,本文通过尼古拉斯·伦格关于政治理论中反佩拉吉想象的作品来分析、评价和回应这一转变。这被定义为一种从非乌托邦、反完美主义和怀疑主义假设开始进行理论推导的倾向。通过这一考察,文章认为,关键转向是反佩拉吉的,但并不总是如此,因为它经常让位于完美主义,对制度采取天真的解读,并假定政治机构和实践的概念要求很高。这种与自身哲学前提的不一致性使得该回合对和平及其前提条件的概念不连贯。最后,本文借鉴了一些反佩拉吉主义学者的观点,并动员了伦格对反佩拉吉主义的特殊辩护。文章认为,提出的替代方案为我们提供了一个更连贯的和平理论,并为我们走出现有的死胡同提供了一条途径。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
10.00%
发文量
11
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信