Constraint of Newtonian Thinking in International Relations Studies

Document Type : .

Authors

Abstract

The vast and rapid changes in the various aspects of human individual and social life, swift transformations of the structures and institutions of the global order, states weaknesses and failures in international relations, strengthen of non-state actors, expanded communications and increasing interdependence among countries, the multidimensional concept of threat and security, has made the international system behavior strongly complex and unpredictable. In such circumstances the current paradigms and theories have been faced with severe restrictions in the study of international relations as the result of Newtonian thinking domination which rely on linear analyzing methods in interpreting these events. As in this methods, the relation between the simple cause and effects are to be considered simple, clear and linear, and the current situation are determining the future. In present article, by studying existing Newtonian approaches in international relation theories, were are to show that international systems are based on non-linear, complex and unpredictable interactions, and complete and clear understanding of international developments couldn’t be reached based on these linear, simplified Newtonian methods. In this regard in order to interpret international system behavior a thinking beyond Newtonian approaches are needed.

Keywords

References

افتخارزاده، ساناز (1392). از آشوب ادراک تا شناخت معماری؛ نظریه ای نوین برای آفرینش معماری انسان مدار براساس قوانین آشوب، تهران: موسسه علم معمار انتشارات سیمای دانش.
رامین، فرح (1391). «نظریه کوانتوم و برهان نظم»، مجله فلسفه و کلام، سال چهل و پنجم، شماره دوم، صص 108-85.
فاتحی نیا، مهدی (1392). مبانی سیستم های دینامیکی و نظریه آشوب، یزد: انتشارات دانشگاه یزد.
قاسمی، فرهاد (1391). اصول روابط بین‌الملل، تهران: انتشارات میزان.
کیانخواه، لیلا (1386). «بررسی تعارض قانون علیت و اصل عدم قطعیت»، فصلنامه علمی پژوهشی حکمت سینوی، شماره 36 و 37، صص 130-115.
گلابچی، محمود و فرجی، امیر (1393). نظریه های نوین در مدیریت پروژه، تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه تهران.
مدوز، دنلا اچ (1392). تفکر سیستمی، ترجمه عادل آذر و حامد فلاح تفتی، تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه امام صادق.
مورن، ادگار (1391). روش، طبیعت طبیعت، ترجمه علی اسدی، چاپ دوم، تهران: انتشارات سروش.
روزنا، جیمز (1384). آشوب در سیاست جهان، ترجمه علیرضا طیّب، تهران: انتشارات روزنه.
Banerjee, Santo, Sule Ercetin, Sefika (2014). Chaos Theory in Politics, Tekin, Ali (Eds), Springer.
Barbour, Ian G. (1997). Religion and Science: Historical and Contemporary Issues, San Francisco, Harper San Francisco.
Bohr, Niels, & Noll, Waldemar (1958). "Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge", American Journal of Physics, New York: Wiley, 26 (8): 38.
Buzan, Barry, & Little, Richard (2001). “Why International Relations Has Failed” Millennium: Journal of International Studies, Vol. 30, No. 1, pp.19–39.
Chai, L. H., & Shoji, M. (2002). “Self-Organization and Self-Similarity in Boiling Systems”, Journal of Heat Transfer, vol. 124, pp. 507-515.
Curlee, Wanda, & Gordon, Robert L. (2010). Complexity Theory and Project Management, John wiley & Sons Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey.
De Broglie, Louis (1955). Physics and Microphysics, trans. M. Davidson, NewYork: Pantheon Books.
Fiedler-Ferrara, N. (2010). Complex thinking: building a new paradigm, Trans. Clarissa Almeida, Anja Pratschke.
Geller, A. (2011). The use of complexity-based models in international relations: a technical overview and discussion of prospects and challenges. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 24(01), 63-80.
Geyer, Robert (2003). “Europeanisation, Complexity and the British Welfare State”, UK: Policy Press, ISBN-10: 1861343019.
Ghys, E. (2012). “The Butterfly effect”, In 12th International Congress on Mathematical Education, Seoul.
Glad, J. (2000). ‘Chaos and Complex Systems Chaos and Complex Systems”, Helsinki University of Technology, (spring), 1–10.
Harrison, N. E. (2006). Thinking about the world we make. Complexity in world politics: Concepts and methods of a new paradigm, 1-23.
Heisenberg, W. (1952). Die Physik der Atomkerne, Taylor & Francis.
Kissan, Dylan (2006). “ The Illusion of Anarchy: Chaos, Complexity and the Origins of World War One”, 2nd Graduate Conference in the Social Sciences, Central European University, Budapest, Hungary.
Laplace, Pierre Simon (1951). A Philosophical Essay on Probabilities, translated into English from the original French 6th ed. by Truscott,F.W. and Emory,F.L., New York: Dover Publications, p.4.
Morgenthau, H.J. (1993), Politics among Nations: the Struggle for Power and Peace, brief edn, revised by K.W. Thompson, New York: McGraw Hill.
Munger, Michael C., (2015), Choosing in Groups: Analytical Politics Revisited, New York: Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-I-107-69962-5.
Peat, F. David (2002). From Certainty to Uncertainty: the story of science and ideas in the twentieth century, Washington, D.C.: Joseph Henry Press, ISBN 0-309-07641-2.
Rathbun, T. Brian (2007). “Uncertain about Uncertainty: Understanding the Multiple meanings of a Crucial concept in international relations theory”, international studies Quarterly, vol. 51, pp 533-557.
Riley, M. A., & Van Orden, G. C. (2005). “Tutorials in contemporary nonlinear methods for the behavioral sciences”, A Digital Publication Available at: WWW.NSF.GOV/SBE/BCS/PAC/NMBS/NMBS.JSP
Waltz, Kenneth N. (1979) Theory of International Politics, New York: McGraw-Hill Publishing Company.
Wendt, Alexander (1999). Social Theory of International Politics, Cambrige: Cambrige University Press
Contemporary Political Studies
Volume 8, Issue 24
November 2017
Pages 73-93

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics