Journals / Uluslararası İlişkiler Dergisi / 2017 / Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 55

“World Peace” in International Relations Thought: A Comparison of Immanuel Kant and Zhao Tingyang Philosophy

Uluslararası İlişkiler Düşüncesinde “Dünya Barışı”: Immanuel Kant ve Zhao Tingyang Felsefesi Üzerine Bir Karşılaştırma

Pages
3–18
Publication Date
2017-09-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

As a result of this normative comparison, it makes an original theoretical contributionto International Relations literature which meets and reconciles Chinese thought with Western thought on the concept of ‘world peace’.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:To challenge widely accepted claims regarding irreconcilability of the Western and Non-Western traditions in International Relations thought, this study aims to make a comparison on the concept of ‘world peace’ inImmanuel Kant’s enlightenment philosophy and Zhao Tingyang’s modern interpretation of ancient Chine’s tianxia philosophy.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In accordance with this purpose, first it focuses to shedding a light on the main notions of these two cosmopolitan world views.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:As a result of this normative comparison, it makes an original theoretical contributionto International Relations literature which meets and reconciles Chinese thought with Western thought on the concept of ‘world peace’.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Batı-dışı Uluslararası İlişkiler Teorileri · Kosmopolitanizm · Tianxia

Abstract

To challenge widely accepted claims regarding irreconcilability of the Western and Non-Western traditions in International Relations thought, this study aims to make a comparison on the concept of ‘world peace’ inImmanuel Kant’s enlightenment philosophy and Zhao Tingyang’s modern interpretation of ancient Chine’s tianxia philosophy. In accordance with this purpose, first it focuses to shedding a light on the main notions of these two cosmopolitan world views. With a departure from these notions, it searches the main principles of world peace in these two perspectives. As a result of this normative comparison, it makes an original theoretical contributionto International Relations literature which meets and reconciles Chinese thought with Western thought on the concept of ‘world peace’.

Özet

Bu çalışma, Uluslararası İlişkiler düşüncesinde yaygın olarak kabul gören Batı geleneği ve Batı-dışı geleneğin uzlaşmazlığı iddiasına karşı Immanuel Kant’ın aydınlanma felsefesinin ve Zhao Tingyang’ın çağdaş bir yorum getirdiği kadim Çin’in tianxia felsefesinin “dünya barışı” kavramı üzerine bir karşılaştırma yapmayı amaçlamaktadır. Bu amaçla, öncelikle iki kozmopolitan dünya görüşünün temel kavramlarına açıklık getirilmektedir. Bu kavramlardan hareketle bu iki görüş açısından dünya barışının sürekliliğinin koşulları araştırılmaktadır. Bu normatif karşılaştırma sonucunda Uluslararası İlişkiler literatürüne Çin ve Batı düşüncesini ‘dünya barışı’ kavramı üzerinde buluşturan ve uzlaştıran özgün bir teorik katkı yapılmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

ORAN, F. Ç., PEKCAN, C. (2017). “World Peace” in International Relations Thought: A Comparison of Immanuel Kant and Zhao Tingyang Philosophy. Uluslararası İlişkiler Dergisi, Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 55, 3–18. https://ajindex.com/articles/80215

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Acharya, Amitav ve Barry Buzan. “Why is there no non-Western international relations theory? An introduction”, Amitav Acharya ve Barry Buzan (der.), Non-Western International Relations Theory: Perspectives On and Beyond Asia, Routledge, 2010, s.1-26.
  2. Barash, David P. Approaches to Peace: A Reader in Peace Studies, NY, Oxford University Press, 2013.
  3. Behera, Navnita Chadha. “Reimagining IR in India”, Amitav Acharya ve Barry Buzan (der.), Non Western International Relations Theory: Perspectives On and Beyond Asia, Routledge, 2010, s.92-117.
  4. Bernstein, Richard ve Ross Munro. The Coming Conflict with China, NY, Vintage Books, 1997.
  5. Bilgin, Pınar. “The ‘Western-Centrism’of Security Studies: Blind Spot or Constitutive Practice?”, Security Dialogue, 2010, Cilt 41, No.6, s.615-622.
  6. Bilgin, Pınar. “Thinking Past ‘Western’IR?”, Third World Quarterly, Cilt 29, No.1, 2008, s.5-23.
  7. Callahan, William A. “Chinese Visions of World Order: Post-hegemonic or a New Hegemony?”, International Studies Review, Cilt 10, 2008, s.749-761.
  8. Callahan, William A. “Tianxia, Empire and the World: Soft Power and China’s Foreign Policy Discourse in the 21st Century”, BICC Working Paper Series, British Inter-University China Centre, No.1, 2007.
  9. Caranti, Luigi. “Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace? Reflections on the Realist Critique of Kant’s Project”, Journal of Human Rights, Cilt 5, No.3, 2006, s.341-353.
  10. Carlson, Allen. “Moving Beyond Sovereignty? A Brief Consideration of Recent Changes in China’s Approach to International Order and the Emergence of the Tianxia Concept”, Journal of Contemporary China, Cilt 20, No.68, 2011, s.89-102.
  11. Cheng, Joseph Y. S. “Convincing the World of China’s Tradition to Pursue Universal Harmony”, Journal of Chinese Political Science, Cilt 17, No.2, 2012, s.165-185.
  12. Ching, Julia. “Chinese Ethics and Kant”, Philosophy East and West, Cilt 28, No.2, Sinological Torque (Apr. 1978), s.161-172.
  13. Davis, Michael C. “Constitutionalism and Political Culture: The Debate over Human Rights and Asian Values”, 11 Harvard Human Rights Journal, 109, 1998, s.109-147.
  14. Eisenstadt, S. N. “Multiple Modernities”, Daedalus, Cilt 129, No.1, December 2000, s.1-29.
  15. Engle, Karen. “Culture And Human Rights: The Asian Values Debate In Context”, 32 N.Y.U. J. International Law. & Politics.291, 2000, s.291-333.
  16. Friedman, Edward. “Immanuel Kant’s Relevance to an Enduring Asia-Pacific Peace”, Edward Friedman ve Barrett L. McCormick (der.), What if China Doesn’t Democratize? Implications for War and P