“Verum Est Ipsum Factum” – True is What Has Been Made as Such

Q2 Arts and Humanities
Torsti Sirén
{"title":"“Verum Est Ipsum Factum” – True is What Has Been Made as Such","authors":"Torsti Sirén","doi":"10.1515/jms-2016-0171","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In traditional International Relations theory (IR), states have been approached from empiricist perspective by using methods and terminologies that consider states as homogeneous ‘speaking billiard balls’, which compete for power, prestige and so forth with each other. This article does not argue that traditional paradigms of IR (such as Classical Realism or Neorealism) would not count any more, vice versa, but what this article argues is that for being able to understand more deeply such topical social phenomena as terrorism, strategic communities, spread of nuclear weapons, nuclear policies, world order, NATO-enlargement, EU-integration, threat scenarios, enemy images an so forth, one has to adopt a more holistic, Constructivist social theoretical, approach than traditional IR offers. In this context Constructivism necessitates at least three things. Firstly, one has to explicitly clear out his/her ontological and epistemological points of departure for being able to operate with Constructivist social theory. In some occasions it may e.g. be necessary to deal with God’s and religions’ ontological and epistemological statuses as signifiers of interests, or as ‘root causes’ of behaviour of many social groups, communities and nations. Secondly, the state should be considered as a ‘decentred subject’ consisting of individuals, many sub-groups, organizational structure, institutions and especially identity structure, which has been purposefully constructed throughout the history (the endogenous perspective), and which is under constant reconstruction through domestic and international discursive interactions (the interactionist perspective). Thirdly, one should take into account that human communities and societies tend to habituate themselves into certain beliefs, values and modes of action that change very slowly over the course of history (the cultural perspective), despite increasing interactions.","PeriodicalId":35160,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Slavic Military Studies","volume":"62 1","pages":"1 - 43"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Slavic Military Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jms-2016-0171","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Abstract In traditional International Relations theory (IR), states have been approached from empiricist perspective by using methods and terminologies that consider states as homogeneous ‘speaking billiard balls’, which compete for power, prestige and so forth with each other. This article does not argue that traditional paradigms of IR (such as Classical Realism or Neorealism) would not count any more, vice versa, but what this article argues is that for being able to understand more deeply such topical social phenomena as terrorism, strategic communities, spread of nuclear weapons, nuclear policies, world order, NATO-enlargement, EU-integration, threat scenarios, enemy images an so forth, one has to adopt a more holistic, Constructivist social theoretical, approach than traditional IR offers. In this context Constructivism necessitates at least three things. Firstly, one has to explicitly clear out his/her ontological and epistemological points of departure for being able to operate with Constructivist social theory. In some occasions it may e.g. be necessary to deal with God’s and religions’ ontological and epistemological statuses as signifiers of interests, or as ‘root causes’ of behaviour of many social groups, communities and nations. Secondly, the state should be considered as a ‘decentred subject’ consisting of individuals, many sub-groups, organizational structure, institutions and especially identity structure, which has been purposefully constructed throughout the history (the endogenous perspective), and which is under constant reconstruction through domestic and international discursive interactions (the interactionist perspective). Thirdly, one should take into account that human communities and societies tend to habituate themselves into certain beliefs, values and modes of action that change very slowly over the course of history (the cultural perspective), despite increasing interactions.
“Verum Est Ipsum Factum”——事实就是事实
在传统的国际关系理论(IR)中,从经验主义的角度看待国家,使用的方法和术语将国家视为同质的“说话台球”,它们相互争夺权力、声望等。本文并不认为传统的国际关系范式(如古典现实主义或新现实主义)不再适用,反之亦然,但本文认为,为了能够更深入地理解诸如恐怖主义、战略社区、核武器扩散、核政策、世界秩序、北约东扩、欧盟一体化、威胁情景、敌人形象等热点社会现象,人们必须采用更全面的、建构主义的社会理论。方法比传统IR提供。在这种情况下,建构主义至少需要三件事。首先,为了能够运用建构主义社会理论,一个人必须明确地清除他/她的本体论和认识论的出发点。例如,在某些情况下,可能有必要将上帝和宗教的本体论和认识论地位作为利益的能指,或作为许多社会群体、社区和国家行为的“根本原因”。其次,国家应该被视为一个“去中心的主体”,由个人、许多子群体、组织结构、制度,尤其是身份结构组成,它在整个历史过程中被有目的地构建(内生视角),并通过国内和国际话语互动(互动主义视角)不断重建。第三,人们应该考虑到,人类社区和社会倾向于使自己习惯于某些信仰、价值观和行动方式,这些信仰、价值观和行为方式在历史进程中变化非常缓慢(从文化的角度来看),尽管相互作用越来越多。
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
Journal of Slavic Military Studies
Journal of Slavic Military Studies Arts and Humanities-History
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
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