寻求普遍的中国国际关系理论:一项不可能的使命？

In Search of Chinese International Relations Theory: a Mission Impossible?

近年来,中国学术界对构建国际关系理论"中国学派"的大讨论缺乏科学哲学的指引,陷入观点之争,形不成共识。诸多观点差异的根本分歧在于国际关系究竟是一门科学还是艺术。自然主义者坚持社会世界的科学研究和社会理论的普遍性。反自然主义者则坚持社会世界的人文研究和社会理论的特殊性。在创建国际关系理论"中国学派"的争论中,自然主义者反对国际关系理论特殊性(如"中国学派")的提法,反自然主义者则反对国际关系理论的普适性。作者认为寻求一种既具有普遍性同时也包含中国特色的国际关系理论是可能的。原因在于,理论产生包含理论建构和理论证明两个过程,理论证明遵循普遍性逻辑,理论建构遵循特殊性逻辑。理论普遍性体现在它遵循共同的证明逻辑,特殊性则体现在理论假说的创造上。由于理论假说提出是创造性过程,使得中国要素的渗入成为可能。中国人对问题的思考,必然带上中国文化与思维方式的烙印,由此提出理论假说,经由验证而成为理论学说,最终将刻上"中国"印记。基于此,创建一种具有普遍性的中国国际关系理论是可能的。

This article responds to the discussion on Chinese International Relations(IR) theory.Research on Chinese IR theory has produced a variety of discourses,but it doesn't reach a consensus on whether it is possible.Naturalists believe all IR theories to be universally true,but anti-naturalists refuse to accept this standpoint.Is it a mission impossible? The author holds that it is possible to establish a universally applicable IR theory with Chinese characteristics.Following Hans Reichenbach(1891–1953),the author distinguishes between the 'context of discovery' and the 'context of justification' in theory-building.Once a hypothesis is proposed,there are canons of logic that determine whether or not it should be accepted—that is,there are rules of method that hold in the context of justification.There are,however,no such rules that will guide someone to formulate the right hypothesis,or even hypotheses that are plausible or fruitful in the context of discovery.Chinese scholars will set their mark on IR theory in the context of discovery.Thus,it is a possible mission to have a universally applicable Chinese IR theory.