もう一つの危機の二〇年 -国際関係論とアメリカン・パラダイム-

相互浸透システムと国際理論

抄録

The American study of international relations since the '60s has been in confusion and disorder. There is no agreement on the future of scientific International Relations, no semblance of a theory nor hope of its development, no agreement about the accumulation of knowledge nor paradigm takeoff, no reliability in the methods nor the data, no credibility in the public domain nor relevance for the foreign policy practitioners.
This is another “twenty years crisis” of confidence in the scientific study of International Relations. The crisis is not merely the result of methodological immaturity, but reflects something fundamental about the human world: it concerns the nature of scientific investigation itself.
In the first part of this article, the state of the field, in confusion and disorder, is reviewed and described, and A. Lijphart's and J. Rosenau's arguments on the scientific revolution in IR are taken for criticism as a starting point for developing an alternative viewpoint, the focus of which is the intersubjective and common meanings of human behavior.
In the latter part, the author looks from an interpretive angle at the study of international relations, refocusing attention on the concrete varieties of cultural meanings in their particularities and complex texture.
The main thrust of the whole argument is, somehow, on the American mainstream of thought in International Relations which is pecuriarly scientistic and ethnocentric in its own way.