集体救赎宏大叙事批判背后的希望——兼评“隐喻与叙事的力量”

IF 2.2 1区社会学 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

International Theory Pub Date : 2020-12-28 DOI:10.1017/S1752971920000561

Guilherme Vasconcelos Vilaça

{"title":"集体救赎宏大叙事批判背后的希望——兼评“隐喻与叙事的力量”","authors":"Guilherme Vasconcelos Vilaça","doi":"10.1017/S1752971920000561","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Kratochwil criticizes two important teleological global narratives of universal progress – Luhmannian systems theory and jus cogens – and defends the need for a non-ideal and situated approach to law and politics. Despite the cogency of Kratochwil's analysis, why should we place our hope in his pragmatic program given the complexity of actual decision-making? This paper shows that more needs to be said about the role of hope grounding Kratochwil's account. Which hopes are hopeless, and which warranted? Why should we care and ‘go on’, choosing to be prudential and political rather than focusing on one's inner development or pleasure?","PeriodicalId":46771,"journal":{"name":"International Theory","volume":"13 1","pages":"552 - 559"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S1752971920000561","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hope behind the critique of grand narratives of collective salvation: remarks on ‘The power of metaphors and narratives’\",\"authors\":\"Guilherme Vasconcelos Vilaça\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S1752971920000561\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Kratochwil criticizes two important teleological global narratives of universal progress – Luhmannian systems theory and jus cogens – and defends the need for a non-ideal and situated approach to law and politics. Despite the cogency of Kratochwil's analysis, why should we place our hope in his pragmatic program given the complexity of actual decision-making? This paper shows that more needs to be said about the role of hope grounding Kratochwil's account. Which hopes are hopeless, and which warranted? Why should we care and ‘go on’, choosing to be prudential and political rather than focusing on one's inner development or pleasure?\",\"PeriodicalId\":46771,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Theory\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"552 - 559\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S1752971920000561\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Theory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1752971920000561\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Theory","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1752971920000561","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 3

摘要

Kratochwil批评了关于普遍进步的两种重要的目的论全球叙事——卢曼系统理论和强制法——并捍卫了对法律和政治采取非理想和情境方法的必要性。尽管克拉托威尔的分析很有说服力，但考虑到实际决策的复杂性，我们为什么要把希望寄托在他的务实计划上呢?这篇论文表明，关于克拉托维奇的叙述中希望所起的作用，还有更多需要说的。哪些希望是无望的，哪些是有根据的?为什么我们要关心和“继续”，选择谨慎和政治，而不是专注于一个人的内在发展或快乐?

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Hope behind the critique of grand narratives of collective salvation: remarks on ‘The power of metaphors and narratives’

Abstract Kratochwil criticizes two important teleological global narratives of universal progress – Luhmannian systems theory and jus cogens – and defends the need for a non-ideal and situated approach to law and politics. Despite the cogency of Kratochwil's analysis, why should we place our hope in his pragmatic program given the complexity of actual decision-making? This paper shows that more needs to be said about the role of hope grounding Kratochwil's account. Which hopes are hopeless, and which warranted? Why should we care and ‘go on’, choosing to be prudential and political rather than focusing on one's inner development or pleasure?

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

International Theory Multiple-

CiteScore

6.60

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Editorial board International Theory (IT) is a peer reviewed journal which promotes theoretical scholarship about the positive, legal, and normative aspects of world politics respectively. IT is open to theory of absolutely all varieties and from all disciplines, provided it addresses problems of politics, broadly defined and pertains to the international. IT welcomes scholarship that uses evidence from the real world to advance theoretical arguments. However, IT is intended as a forum where scholars can develop theoretical arguments in depth without an expectation of extensive empirical analysis. IT’s over-arching goal is to promote communication and engagement across theoretical and disciplinary traditions. IT puts a premium on contributors’ ability to reach as broad an audience as possible, both in the questions they engage and in their accessibility to other approaches. This might be done by addressing problems that can only be understood by combining multiple disciplinary discourses, like institutional design, or practical ethics; or by addressing phenomena that have broad ramifications, like civilizing processes in world politics, or the evolution of environmental norms. IT is also open to work that remains within one scholarly tradition, although in that case authors must make clear the horizon of their arguments in relation to other theoretical approaches.