國際關係的規範理論在第二次世界大戰之後長期被邊緣化，但近年來已經開始復興，國 際關係各學派也紛紛開始重新探討其規範論述。在這個潮流下，現實主義學派內部也出 現了所謂「批判的現實主義」的呼聲，其中的一個籲求就是要恢復現實主義的倫理維度。 為了呼應這個籲求，本研究打算先從當代的三位現實主義大師（韋伯、尼布爾、摩根索） 的規範思想出發，探討它們與當代國際規範議題之間的關連性，然後回溯到古代與近代 四位具有代表性的思想家（修昔底德、奧古斯丁、馬基維利、霍布斯）的規範論述。長 期以來，國際關係學界在運用這些思想家的主張與論述時，存在著嚴重的偏差，也就是 把他們當作非道德政治或道德懷疑論的提倡者。目前國際關係學界已有許多修正主義的 研究為這些思想家翻案，指出他們被誤解與濫用之處。本研究延續這個作法，試圖澄清 這些思想家的論述意圖與規範立場。透過這個研究，本計畫試圖闡明，現實主義的傳統 不僅不乏規範論述，甚至可以說有極為豐富的規範論述，因而值得吾人予以重新評價。 除此之外，本研究還試圖探索現實主義的規範立場對於吾人思索當代的國際規範問題可 能有什麼涵義。 Normative theories in International Relations (IR) have long been marginalized in the study of International Relations ever sinceWWII. But we are now witnessing its renaissance; various schools of IR begin to explore their respective normative discourses. In coping with this trend, a school of thought within realism, “critical realism”, is calling for reclaiming the normative dimension of the realist tradition. Echoing this call, this project sets out to study the normative discourses of three contemporary realist giants--Max Weber, Reinhold Niebuhr and Hans Morgenthau, and then traces their origins to the normative ideas of ancient and modern thinkers such as Thucydides, St. Augustine, Machiavelli and Hobbes. The ideas of these thinkers have long been distorted or mis-appropriated by students of IR as advocating some sort of amoral politics or moral skepticism. But now there is a body of revisionist literature trying to do justice to these thinkers by redressing the abuse of their thought. This project is a continuation of this endeavor, as it attempts to clarify the discursive intention and normative position of these thinkers. In so doing, the project means to demonstrate that the realist tradition is not devoid of normative discourses; rather, its normative ideas are quite sophisticated and so deserve reevaluation. Moreover, it will explore the relevance and implication of realist normative position for the study of normative issues we are facing today.
