【作者】 刘树才；

【导师】 范军；

【作者基本信息】 华东师范大学 ， 国际关系， 2014， 博士

【副题名】论雷蒙·阿隆的战争研究

【摘要】 战争研究是国际关系研究中的重要组成部分。既有的研究多从人、国家和无政府状态三个层面来分析战争的原因。这些研究共享着三个预设：1)试图探究战争的普遍理论,对战争的特殊性缺乏关注；2)将国内政治和国外政治区分开来,对国内政治与战争形态之间的关联性缺乏分析；3)将国际政治同一般意义上的社会变革区分开来。这些预设在帮助国际关系建立了自身研究范式的同时也限制了战争研究的革新。特别是冷战结束后,战争形态的变化对这三种预设提出了挑战。本文试图从思想史的角度挖掘法国国际关系学的开创者雷蒙·阿隆对战争的思考,进而寻找突破上述战争研究盲点的可能性。国家间的无政府状态让战争的阴影笼罩在国际关系上,由于阿隆支持这一观点,他被学界归入古典现实主义者的行列。本文试图打破这种标签性的认识,运用思想史的方法,将阿隆置于20世纪的语境之下,以战争问题为中心,分析它与阿隆的历史哲学研究、社会学研究和政治学研究的关联性,从而丰富我们对战争的理解。本文共分为五章。第一章绪论部分交代了本文的问题意识、研究现状和论文的基本框架。接下来的三章分析从历史哲学、社会学和政治学三个层面分析它们与战争研究的关系。第五章对全文做出总结。第二章试图在阿隆的历史哲学和战争研究间搭建某种关联性。阿隆的历史哲学包含批判的历史哲学(即历史本体论)和思辨的历史哲学(即历史认识论)两部分。本章将阿隆置于历史哲学的两种谱系之中展现其历史哲学,在历史本体论上,阿隆批判历史目的论和历史宿命论,努力捍卫一种开放性的多元历史观；在历史认识论上,阿隆批评了实证主义的局限性和相对主义的困境,坚持客观性的理解和或然性的因果。历史本体论是20世纪意识形态的重要组成部分,它为现代战争提供合法性的辩护,并成为现代战争的重要“武器”。历史认识论为阿隆的战争研究提供了历史社会学的研究路径。该路径从或然性的因果出发,强调价值相关,借助理想类型和比较来展开研究。“历史”为战争研究提供了认识论前提和重要的变量。在某种程度上,它可以克服国际关系在解读战争时缺乏“历史性”的盲点。第三章主要呈现了阿隆对战争与工业社会之间关系的思考。首先分析了社会学为什么忽视战争,阿隆对社会学的理解及其战争社会学的核心内容。作为社会学家,通过与19世纪思想家如托克维尔、孔德、马克思等展开对话,阿隆阐明了他对战争与社会变革思考。阿隆批判性地继承了前人的遗产,从技术出发来解读了战争与工业社会的关系。从技术的不对称性和技术的惊奇两个概念出发,剖析了技术在20世纪战争中扮演的角色。第四章围绕着战争与国内政治的关系展开。阿隆试图超越伦理化和形而上学式的政治,坚持政治是一种在对立中寻求妥协和合作的艺术。战争与政治之间的关联性体现在政体、国家形态、目的和手段的关系等三个层面。第三帝国发动二战离不开极权主义政体的支持;政治体制的对立是冷战对峙的重要内容。战争与国家形态的关系主要围绕着战争与20世纪民族国家、帝国间关系展开。现代社会的平等辩证法和普遍化的辩证法影响着帝国的衰落和民族国家的兴起。战争与政治,谁是目的,谁是手段,阿隆在与克劳塞维茨的对话中形成了他的观点。他认为克劳塞维茨不是极端战争的始作俑者,而是有限战争的积极提倡者。战争与政治的关系,因着战争和政治内涵的变化也在不断变化中。所以战争与政治的目的与手段之争并没有一个统一的答案,它常常因时因地而变化。第五章结论部分笔者用“三维一体”将阿隆的战争研究统和起来。三维指的是历史、社会、政治三个战争研究的重要维度,“一体”指的是历史认识论为战争研究提供了认识论基础。这三个维度可以弥补国际关系理论在研究战争时的盲点,激发着战争研究提出新的问题意识、研究视野和方法。更多还原

【Abstract】 War study is the central topic of international relations. Among the research,there are three dimensions explored by the scholars to explain the cause of war:human being,state and anarchy. These researches shared three common premises. The first was that they tried to find out the general reason of war, short of concern about the war’s peculiarities; the second premise was the distinction between internal politics and international politics, short of analysis of the link between inner politics and the forms of war; and the third was the distinction between international politics and the social transfiguration. Although the common premises helped to establish the paradigm of International Relations, they have been hindering the evolution of war study. They are challenged by the war in reality after the end of cold war. This dissertation tries to use the approach of intellectual history to research the founding fathers of international relations, Raymond Aron’s study of war in order to find the possibility to break through these blind points of IR.Generally, Aron was considered as the scholar in the school of classic realism, since he supported the point that anarchy would bring war between nations. Yet this dissertation try to update this label by settling Aron in the context of intellectual history and finding out the connections among war,history,society and politics.This dissertation includes five chapters. The first chapter is the introduction which will talk about the problematique, research state and the whole structure of the dissertation.The next three chapters analyze the war study by philosophy of history, sociology and politics. And the last chapter is the conclusion.The second chapter constructs the connection between war study and the philosophy of history.The first section analyzes Aron’s philosophy of history in the genealogy of historical philosophy.His philosophy of history includes metaphysical historical philosophy(historical ontology)and critical historical philosophy (historical epistemology). Aron criticized the historical teleology and fatalism,and defended an open and pluralistic vision of history on the subject of historical ontology.Aron also criticized the positivism and relativism,and stressed the objective understanding and contingent causality. The following two sections analyzed the connection between historical ontology and war,the connection between historical epistemology and war. Historical ontology which was an essential part of ideology in20th century justified the modern war and become the weapon of modern war. His historical epistemology supported war study a new approach that is historical sociology which stresses the contingent causality,related value,ideal type and comparative method.The third chapter discusses Aron’s thought about the relations between war and industrial society. The first section analyzed why sociology ignored war and Aron’s opinion on sociology and war sociology. The following section discussed how Aron dialogue with Comte,Tocqueville and Marx on the connection between war and modern society. The third section analyzed how Aron use the term technical surprise and technical asymmetry to analyze the role of technology in the20th century war.The fourth chapter discusses the connection between war and internal politics. The first section analyzes Aron’s vision of politics which attempt to transcend the ethnical and metaphysical politics and emphasized that politics was an art of achieving compromise from the struggle. The following three sections research concretely the connection between war and politics in three dimensions like regime,the form of state,the end and the means. Without the support of totalitarian regime,The Third Reich wouldn’t provoke the second world war and the opposition between regimes were essential part of cold war. Nation state and empire,they are the central agent of war. In modern society,the dialectics of equality and universalism are the cause of war and influenced the decline of empire and the rise of nation-state.which is the end,war or politics?Aron researched the thought of Clausewitz and regarded it as the proponents of limited war. The relations between war and politics would change due to their changing meaning and there was no definite answer to this question.The last chapter conclude Aron’s war study in term of "three dimensions in integration". History,society and politics composed three dimensions of Aron’s war study, and they are all the reflection and inner base of the war and its study. Aron’s war study can make up the blind points of IR and stir up new problematiques,perspectives and methods.更多还原