| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
191674
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
While the theory of the Chinese School of International Relations (CSIR) has contributed new dimensions to IR such as the concept of relationality into theorisation practice, it also faces the same pitfalls as the schools of thought that precede it: it pays insufficient attention to the relationship between ethics and subjectivity despite its repetitive use of such concepts as ‘morality’ in its articulation of contemporary world affairs and insufficient attention to the ethical dimension of IR that makes this approach prone to dismissing the voices of ‘others’. This ethical problem in CSIR emanates from inadequate consideration of temporality and its relation to ethics. However, introducing the present, or Nikon (而今), an Asian-originating case of temporality based on the Mahāyāna Buddhist ontological ethics, illustrates how this manifestation of Buddhist temporality offers solutions to mitigate the ethical drawback of the Chinese School discourses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
137080
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This paper investigates the risk presumably involved in the narratives of non-Western international relations theory (IRT) by focusing on a similar historical case in Japan. It reveals the risk of uncritically accepted geographical division, and particularly focuses on the discourses of the Kyoto School's theory of world history as an example of non-Western narratives in the past, which was to ‘overcome’ the Western civilization similar to the contemporary non-Western IRT. However, they are also infamous for providing justification for the wartime regime in Japan for their aggression in the Asian continent. What is the connection between their philosophy and support for the imperialist regime? If there is a connection between them, is there any possibility of the resurrection of the same results in the case of non-Western IRT? To answer these questions, the article introduces the philosophy of Tosaka Jun who was critical of the School but, unlike Kyoto School philosophers, stubbornly fought against the mainstream politics of the time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
101964
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Takashi Inoguchi once stated that Japan's international relations theory is characterized by its exclusive disciplinary orientation toward constructivism. Nishida Kitaro is widely recognized as one of such constructivists. In this article, I argue that Nishida's theory of world history was based on the perception of subjectivity of contradiction, and was thus exclusively culture-oriented. By emphasizing cultural aspects, he tried to disturb the coherence and consistency of the colonialist discourse on which the dominant regime of Japan of the time was entirely reliant. However, because Nishida's theory of world history completely lacked the recognition of the material relations of the colonizer and the colonized, as a direct consequence of his understanding of the term 'culture', his attempts were unrealized.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|