Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
BY NICHOLAS .
SPYKMAN
Professor of Political Science, Yale University
You have invited me to present to you my views
regarding the study of international relations and its
different methods of approach. That means that you wish
me to acquaint you with the results of a philosophic
inquiry. Our topic today is philosophy, and in
particular the field of epistemology, logic and
methodology. There is no need to say anything about
logic or the study of valid inference and the paper
itself is a study in methodology and will have to tell
its own story, but I must state briefly the particular
epistemology on which it is based. My theory of
knowledge is a particular form of Neo-Kanteanism which
I would like to characterize as functional relativism.
Knowledge, according to this theory, results from
definite attitudes and definite procedures of dealing
with empirical reality. It derives from the
observations of empirical reality by means of specific
categories of knowledge. It becomes necessary,
therefore, to distinguish at the outset two worlds—the
world of empirical reality and the world of ideas, of
concepts and values. The thinking of an idea and the
attributing of value may be viewed as psychological
occurrences in individual minds and, as such, as part
of empirical reality, but the idea and the value also
belong to a different realm in which they are subject
to study by means of logical methods, but not by means
of scientific or historical methods. It is by means of
the ideal—the conceptual—that we master the real.
Although the rational is only a small part of the world,
there is no other way to master the world. The totality
of empirical reality is as such incomprehensible. It
permits the beholder an attitude of mysticism, but not
intelligent comprehension. Any effort to comprehend
means a renunciation of the totality of reality and a
focussing on a specialized aspect. To comprehend
requires an analysis of the reality in different
aspects by means of guiding concepts and categories,
and abstracting of these aspects from that reality.
My philosophy is relativistic in that I do not
accept an absolute c priori fixity for those
categories of cognition. The ways of looking at the
world are historical. They are subject to evolution,
and what is a priori in one form
[t should be noted here that the word " socäa[ is a purely for Inal concept and
gives no indication as to content or as to peace or struggle. A struggle is a more
intimate relation than a peaceful walk, and society contains both con ßict and
coöperation. Order and anarchy do not connote presence or absence of society 7
but presence or absence of government. Disorderly relations are still relations and
disorderly conduct is essentially social conduct Robinson Crusoe was never
arrested for disorderly conduct? not only because there was no one to arrest hir•n
before the arrival of Friday; but because it takes two to make a fight.
ft follows from this that "society" is a purely quantitative concept- A given
society is the total of social relations, the total of observable social behavior. A
society is simple or complex, depending on the multiplicity and manifoldness of
the consisting social relations. The total asbect of that part of empirical reality
called society, social behavior, or of any section of it, is again subject to further
analysis and differentiation on the basis of so-called content. It is this distinction
that will give us studies of marriage institutions, of economic organization, and
of forms of government.
These three viewpoints focussing on certain fundamental needs and the activities
which spring from them, have given rise to specialized social studies, but they do
not exhaust the possible ways from which social empirical reality can be
regarded.
International Relations. International relations are relations between
individuals belonging to different states, or in other terms, international
behavior is the social behavior of individuals or groups aimed, directed at, or
influenced by the existence or behavior of individuals or groups belonging to
a different state.
I proposed several years ago that we use the term inter-state relations. There
is little likelihood of its acceptance—and perhaps more 13,701.11d be lost than
gained. I Shall therefore accept the term " international 2 ' under the clear
understanding that it means belonging to different states, and not to
which I propose the term inter-ethnic. ft may be that
any given relationship is either or both; but the fact that they are not identical
forces us to make distinctions in terminology.
International relations is therefore a political concept. It makes the die
tinction between national and international relations on the basis of a difference in
legal and political conditioning. Those relations that function in their totality
within one system of territorial organization are called national, those in which the
participants are members of different terri torial organizations are called
international.
JezLernotionaJ Society, What holds for the concept of society must of
course hold for international society. It is a formal and purely relative and
quantitative concept, International society is more or less complex at
difierent periods—meaning there are more and varying international
relations.
SECOND
a logical point ot vieu•, the question u•hethcr or not there exists alt international
society has no nieaning. There is a valid historical question as to how much international
society at any given period, and a valid question as to whether you like it or not, but we
should again be careful not to think of society as a unity and confuse social relations with
orderly relations. Anarchy and order do not connote absence or presence. of international
society. but absence or presence of govern Inent. In passing, let us note chac also Ill the
realm of international relations struggle is a illore in(irnatc relation than peace. have
never been so intimately related to the Gerrnan,s as during the War. I am not referring to
those of lil_v generation who had the privilege of being disemboweled by them, but to
the whole civilian population whose most varied thoughts and activities carne to be
influenced by the e.xistence and actions of our Teuton enemies.
It is also true that the word international stands for a purely for Inal
concept: it applies to an international wedding, to a white slave cartel, as
well as to the of 1812. In ternational relations are as varied in their content
as are social relations—and international society, as well as national
societ_v. provides the subject-matter for the social disciplines. In the
international realm also certain types of relationships have been given more
attention than others, and the economic and political have perhaps been
•more carefully studied, but it is enough to refer to the studies of the
ethnologist in the_diffusion of culture to realize that international society
contains much than merely economic or political relations.
International society is the general subject-matter of our studies and,
depending on our particular interestt cultural, economic, legal, or political,
we will obtain our specialized subject-matter on the basis of a further
abstraction in terms of special categories-
International Political Relations. I am a political scientist and I am in terested
in political behavior. The concept of political behavior which guides me in my
abstracting from the total empirical social reality makes me search for
thö&ehavior that is directed or the aspect of behavior Ivhich aims at the
establishment, preservation, modification and use of leadership and social control,
or in other words, that behavior that has reference to the struggle for power and
the establishment and functioning of government.
The ultimate unit of political behavior both in the national and in the
international sphere is the individual. But in the international sphere the
struggle for pmver and the participation in international government takes
place through a particular type of corporate organization called a state, and
so the state becomes the immediate unit of political behavior. My study is
the political behavior of states and the resulting international government.
About international goverument and politics I ask all the questions that
have been asked about nation?l government and politics—or, for that
matter, which have been asked abou! the governrnent and politics of
churches, labor
62 FIFTH CONFERENCE OF TEACHERS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW
The so-called " social sciences ' are not based on so-called distinctions of
content, as is clear from the fact that a study of the currency system of Poly nesia
is called ethnology, and of the lack of currency system of the United States is
called economics. It is not my task here to propose a more adequate and scientific
terminology for the studies dealing with social phenomena, and therefore I
propOse to call social science any study that aims to answer scientific questions
regarding social behavior.
Specific Probl.elns in the Social Sciences. There arise in the study of social
behavior, certain difficulties that rnust be mentioned briefly. The first results
from the apparent di fliculty of preserving the scientific non-evaluative
attitude—in regard to human behavior. The student must learn to restrain his
tendency to react in terms of approval and disapproval, and to separate his value
judgments and his existential judgments.
The evaluative tendency enters into our problem in another manner.
Human behavior, observed in so far as it is not simple reflex action, is not
behavior in response to a neutral external environment, but to an
environment transformed by an evaluative attitude on the part of the
behaving person. This creates the problem not only of difference in
environment between different actors, but between actors and observers-
The second difficulty results from the apparent individual and historic-al
uniqueness of individual behavior- In part this difficu)ty is not due to the nature of
the behavior process, but to our habit of looking at it. Most of the observations have
been made from the individualizing historical point of view, and not from the
generalizing scientific point of view. If Newton had focussed all his attention on the
fact that the apple was green and the moon was yellow, and that the one fell in a
straight line and the other ran around in circles, he would never have discovered
the law of gravitation.
The fact that human behavior shows different responses to different en
vironments creates, of course, no problem. So do the units of behavior studied
in the other molecules, cells, cell s structures. What creates
the problem is that because of our inability to isolate single factors in internal
conditioning, single factors in the behavior complex, and single factors in the
environment, it seems as though human behavior must bf provisionally
accepted as showing the possibility of different responses to identical
environment. This naturally affects the predictability of individual behavior
and for the time being we will have to be satisfied with statistical prediction of
quantities of units, a condition. not so different from the biological sciences.
Understanding. Another problem resulting from the nature of the observer
is the problem of understanding. Understanding social behavior, that is,
human behavior, raises a problem which does not exist in understanding the
behavior of atomic structures or of living cells- It arises from the identity of
the nature of the behavior observed with the behavior we our-
SECOND SESSION 63
he also knows the new situation B which he wishes to bring about. The new
situation is called health. Sometimes that is impossible, but let us assume in
our given case that it is possible. The new situation B conceived by the
doctor as desirable is called health. But does the concept " health " function
only in connection with the formulation of the desired state? Obviously not;
SECOND SESSION
it functions also asa basic concept in the diagnosis itself. The diagnosis
results from an analysis in terms of the component sciences of medicine 73
through means to ends can be seen in its entirety. But under unstable
conditions, or in a highly complex society, there arise ethical problems. Under
such conditions the difficulty of evaluating means derives from the fact that a
given action not only leads to the end desired, but to a great many other
consequences. Some of these other consequences may be highly undesirable
and a course of action pursued without reference to its by-products may
therefore bring about a total situation which is worse instead of better t although
it contains the specific end desired.
It is one of the tragedies of complex modern society that the individual
actions have the most far-reaching social consequences not apparent to the
actor. It is therefore impossible for him to have ethically valid judgments
about his own actions. Most social behavior is ethically blind. To help the
poor individual is the task of social ethics, but it does so only if it is based
on adequate social science.
The field of ethics covers therefore a general theory of value and an
investigation into the various fields of value, such as health, wealth and
happiness, power, fame and justice. But it also contains as social ethics the
application of ethical judgments to concrete cases of social behavior and to
specific institutions and, in more general form, the' conceptual construction
of ideal societies.
Social Theory. Social ethics usually takes the form of a specialized sthics
parading as a social science. We do not observe social behavior as such, but
usually a particular kind of social behavior, such as economic behavior or
political behavior. It is in this specialized aspect that social behavior has
been most sysCematically studied, and it is in this specialized aspect that our
ethics appears in the form of economic theory or political theory. Such
theories contain a peculiar mixture of ethics and science, and are usually
based on an impfied or explicit metaphysics. They contain a set of basic
value judgments as to the kind of society desired, and in so far as they
advocate aeion, their recommendation of means to be used to reach the ends
desired muåt be based on knowledge of the functioning of means—that is,
science.
Social theory, then, is a series of recommendations based on a factual
knowledge of social behavior in terms of means. The efficacy of the means
recommended can be challenged as based on insufficient or faulty
knowledge, but the basic value judgments cannot be challenged. The radical,
liberal and conservative social theories can never be reconciled because they
start from different premises.
The political theorist of international society starts with a series of basic
assumptions regarding the kind of international society he would like. That
SECOND SESSION
basic assumption may be that war is a jolly pastime, or that the destruction
of human life is evil. Or it may be the idea that a system made up of
sovereign autonomous states is an inadequate piece of political machinery
77
his disposal. If he can't lock her up or fine her, maybe he can shame her by
calling her names, or by trying laughter or satire. If that does not work— he
can tell her to go to hell! The technique of manipulating cells and organs . is
not enough. There is needed the additional technique of manipulating
humans.
It is positively delightful to be a technical engineer or an architect. Bricks
and girders don't even talk back. It is pleasant to be a doctor; patients like the
lady who do not wish to be cured are rare. But it is positively disheartening
to be a social engineer. Let us draw the parallel of this exceptional experience
of the doctor in the social and the international field and we shall see that it
is merely the ordinary experience of the social engineer.
It has already been noted that on the social plane the concept of health has
no equivalent. The job of convincing the patient or patients that they ought
to like the particular brand of health which we recommend becomes therefore
an important aspect of social control. Theoretically this is not part of the
engineering technique, but in practice it is always mixed up with it on the
social plane,
SECOND SESSION
The first difference between the doctor and the social engineer is that what is
indirect means for the doctor becomes direct means fof the social engineer.
Influencing individual behavior is the indirect means to the influencing of organic
behavior in order to obtain organic results. Influencing social behavior is for the
social engineer the direct means to obtain desired social l' results. The
technical engineer and the doctor do not go into action until someone gives
him a job or somebody wants to be cured. In that case the desired endis settled
and the job is a purely technical job. Such occasions arise in the social plane
only rarely. They are represented by the work of the technical experts of the
governments.
But it is not only the government expert who applies the processes of applied
science. Mr. and Mrs. Ordinary Citizen use similar thought processes, hoWever
poorly, when they exercise their divine right to be politically active alid urge
legislative measures. When they do so they must have a notion of what the social
situation is, of the kind of social situation they would like, and a belief that the
proposed legislation would bring the desired results.
International Relations. Applied science in international relations is the
work of the experts of the national governments, of the experts of the
international organization, splendidly represented by the Secretariat of the
League, and of Mr. and Mrs. Ordinary Citizen in so far as they are engaged
in trying to influence foreign policy.
The most spectacular of this kind of activity is the work of the diplomat
and statesman. He has the task of influencing the behavior of one or more
states in a direction thaq. suits his own state, whether because of material
FIFTH CONFERENCE OF TEACHERS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW
74
may progress toward that gradual clarification of the nature of our activities,
which is so essential a prerequisite of work of high quality.
Ckairman GARNER. We now have a report on " Seminar and Essay Topice
and Methods" by Professor Charles E. Hill, of George Washington University.
Universität
cd
:0
Berlin, Triepel . . 12
Bonn, Thoma . . 3 35
Breslau, Heilborn.... 3 25
Erlangen, Köhler 31
7 4
Frankfurt a. M. , Strupp - . 10
Freibure i. Br. v. Rohland . 4 1
Giessen, Heyland . 4 10 4 27
Göttingen, Kraus . 6
8
2 4 23
Greifswald, Hubrich 7 35
Halle, Fleischman .
4 24
Hamburg, Perels . . 2 31
Heidelberg, v. Kirchenheim . 2 30
Jena; 2 6 5 23
Kieh hücking Köln, 29
Ebers . .
8 19
Königsberg, Wolgast . . 51
7
Leipzig, Simons . 2 .35 49
Marburg, Bredt. . . 4 11
1 35 2 27
2
München, Neumeyer. . 4 30 32 1 274
Münster, Lucas. . 2 19
Rostock, Haff . 9 26 6 12
Tübingen, v. Pohl . 39
Würzburg, Meurer
Innsbruck, Lamp .
Graz, Lenz - . 17 23 127 83 109 75 29 15 142 110 1 850
WIen, Strisower