沃尔兹：《国际政治理论》读书笔记

第一章 规律与理论

沃尔兹拒绝把理论界定为由两个或多个规律组成的系列，而采用其第二种含义：理论解释规律。【8】（Since I see no reason for wasting the word "theory" by defining it as a set of two or more laws, I adopt the second meaning of the term: Theories explain laws.pp.6）解释的意涵是：“说明为什么预期的结果都在一定限度内发生，为什么行为模式不断重现，为什么一些事件（甚至包括任何国家都不喜欢或者很少有国家喜欢的事件）会不断重复发生。”【92】理论的建构。理论的检验方法，In order to test a theory, one must do the following:

1. State the theory being tested.

2. Infer hypotheses from it.

3. Subject the hypotheses to experimental or observational tests.

4. In taking steps two and three, use the definitions of terms found in the theory being tested.

5. Eliminate or control perturbing variables not included in the theory under test.

6. Devise a number of distinct and demanding tests.

7. If a test is not passed, ask whether the theory flunks completely, needs repair and restatement, or requires a narrowing of the scope of its explanatory claims.pp.13

第二章 还原主义理论

还原法的实质就是通过研究各组成部分来理解整体。国际政治中采用还原法，因为国家角儿或行为看上去常常可以解释世界上绝大部分事件。【25】对霍布森-列宁的帝国主义论进行评判，【26-35】新的殖民主义理论，【36-45】沃尔兹认为，霍布森和列宁，“他们犯了一个可以理解的错误，即认为19世纪末和20世纪初这一特定时期的资本主义的解决办法（如果真的是解决办法的话）可以解决帝国主义这一普遍而古老的问题，而且还可以解决战争问题。”【45】（They made the understandable error of thinking that the solution, even if it were such, of the specific problem of imperialism in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries would be a solution to the general and age-old problem of imperialism and also to the problem of war.pp.35）随后的马克思主义者以及其他新殖民主义理论家，“他们重新对世界进行诠释，以使它可以适合他们对一个旧理论的错误解释。”【45-6】（They reinterpret the world to make it fit their misinterpretations of an old theory.pp.35……offering not explanations but redefinitions designed less to account for the phenomena than to salvage a theory.pp.36）带有经济决定论色彩的理解和批评。【46】

第三章 系统方法与理论

比较分析性方法和系统方法。分析性方法将整体还原为分离的个体，然后检验各部分的性质和彼此间的联系，对整体的理解是通过对处于相对简单状态的各要素的研究以及对其联系的观察得来的。【52】更简单，但不总是充分。“只有在系统层次的影响不存在或是异常微弱，以至于可以忽略不计的情况下，分析性方法才是充分的。”【53】（It will be sufficient only where systems-level effects are absent or are weak enough to be ignored.pp.39）系统方法，结构和互动的单元两个层次。【53】（A system is then defined as a set of interacting units. At one level, a system consists of a structure, and the structure is the systems-level component that makes it possible to think of the units as forming a set as distinct from a mere collection. At another level, the system consists of interacting units.pp.40）考察罗斯克兰斯、霍夫曼和卡普兰的理论进行检验。【55-78】

第四章 还原方法与系统理论

【既有理论的不足】传统方法与现代方法的相似性，分析者将注意力集中于互动的单元，却没有认识到系统原因的作用。【83】（The similarity of traditional and modern approaches to the study of international politics is easily shown. Analysts who confine their attention to interacting units, without recognizing that systemic causes are in play, compensate for the omissions by assigning such causes arbitrarily to the level of interacting units and parcelling them out among actors.pp.62）二者在本质上都是行为主义者，都根据行为单元来提出解释，而将环境所可能具有的影响置之一旁。【85】（Differences across traditional and modem schools are wide enough to obscure their fundamental similarity. The similarity, once seen, is striking: Members of both schools reveal themselves as behavioralists under the skin. Members of both schools offer explanations in terms of behaving units while leaving aside the effect that their situations may have.pp.64）尽管行为者的属性和互动方式千差万别，但国际结果的相似性和重复性却始终存在，从而一再证明低层次解释的不足。【90】

【系统的结构层次】结构的持久性解释了国际政治生活不断重现的模式和特性。【93】（A constancy of structure explains the recurrent patterns and features of international-political life.pp.70）结构有可能突然发生变化……随着结构的改变，单元在系统中的布局也随之改变，由此导致对单元行为及其互动所产生的结果的新的预期。理论解释跨系统的变化。只有当政治结构指明了因果关系，并揭示出这些结果如何随着结构的变化而各异时，国际政治理论才能算是成功的。【93】（Structures, moreover, may suddenly change. A structural change is a revolution, whether or not violently produced, and it is so because it gives rise to new expectations about the outcomes that will be produced by the acts and interactions of units whose placement in the system varies with changes in structure. Across systems, a theory explains change. A theory of international politics can succeed only if political structures are defined in ways that identify their causal effects and show how those effects vary as structures change.pp.70）沃尔兹所界定的结构指的是“一系列约束条件”，“它起到一种选择器的作用……结构通过奖励某些行为，同时对某些行为进行惩罚来进行选择。”【98】（a set of constraining conditions, ……acts as a selector,pp.73……structures select by rewarding some behaviors and punishing others, outcomes cannot be inferred from intentions and behaviors.pp.74）结构施加影响的方式有：（1）社会化限制和形塑行为；（2）竞争【101】尽管单元以及彼此的互动模式千差万别，但是不同的结构可以导致相同的结果。【103】（Different structures may cause the same outcomes to occur even as units and interactions vary.pp.77）混淆系统内不同层次之间的区别，一直是影响国际政治理论发展的主要障碍。【104】（The next chapter shows how to define political structures in a way that makes the construction of a systems theory possible.pp.78）

第五章 政治结构

【对结构的界定】“系统由结构和互动的单元组成。结构是全系统范围内的组成部分，使得系统能够被视为一个整体。”【106】（A system is composed of a structure and of interacting units. The structure is the system-wide component that makes it possible to think of the system as a whole.pp.79）沃尔兹对系统予以界定，“结构必须根据系统各个组成部分的排列及其排列原则来界定。”【108】（It must instead be defined by the arrangement of the system's parts and by the principle of that arrangement.pp80）它从三个方面加以界定，即单元的排列原则、单元的功能差异和单元的能力分配：

（1）排列原则（ordering principles）。“国内系统是集权制的、等级制的，而国际系统内各部分的关系则是平等的。”……“没有政府的统治”【118】（Domestic systems are centralized and hierarchic. The parts of international-political systems stand in relations of coordination.……"politics in the absence of government.pp.88）

（2）功能特性（the character of the units）。国家作为基本行为单位，功能基本相似。（The

states that are the units of international-political systems are not formally differentiated by the functions they perform. Anarchy entails relations of coordination among a system's units, and that implies their sameness.pp.93）

（3）能力分配（the distribution of capabilities）。抽象掉国家的一切特质及具体联系，只考虑能力分配状况和国家间秩序的类型。【132】[1]

第六章 无政府秩序与均势

【无政府秩序】沃尔兹考察了无政府领域和等级制领域的行为和后果:

（1）国内暴力和国外暴力，国内系统并非自助系统，国际系统则正相反。【137】（A national system is not one of self-help. The international system is.pp.104）

（2）相互依赖与一体化，国内专业化和分工合作实现共同利益，国际自利主义，对安全的考虑迫使经济收益服从于政治利益。【141-142】（In a self-help system, considerations of security subordinate economic gain to political interest.pp.107）

（3）结构与战略。无论意图如何，结构对结果的强大影响。【146】

（4）无政府状态的优点。较低的组织成本，【147】国家安全与自由度成反比，【148】武力的使用是为了保卫国家自身及其利益而非正义和权力，【149】国内政治是权威、管理和法律的领域，国际政治则是权力、斗争与和解的领域。【149】

沃尔兹认为两种秩序类型外存在边缘性情况，这并不意味着第三种类型的系统。【153】

【均势】沃尔兹考察了均势理论，（1）均势理论的假设：在一个自助系统中有两个或两个以上的国家共存，在该系统中不存在任何更高的行为体，【156】（two or more states coexist in a self-help system, one with no superior agent to come to the aid of states that may be weakening or to deny to any of them the use of whatever instruments they think will serve their purposes.。pp.118）且国家是单一的、具有目的的行为体，（states are……unitary, purposive actors.pp.119）（2）均势并非基于国家的意图，动机与结果必然一致的假设是错误的。【159】（3）均势被批评无法解释国家的特定政策，但它解释的是约束所有国家的力量，不能混淆国际政治理论与外交政策理论。【161-2】

第七章 结构性原因与经济效果

沃尔兹在这一章说明主要行为体书目较少的系统更好。他提出九点理由，“更小的系统就更稳定，其成员也能够更好地为了共同利益而对事务进行管理。而且，不断的交往经验使各方更易于理解彼此的行为、达成协议并监督协议的执行。因此，稳定的系统也是自我增强的系统。“【182】（Smaller systems are more stable, and their members are better able to manage affairs for their mutual benefit. Stable systems are self-reinforcing, moreover, because understanding others' behavior, making agreements with them, and policing the agreements become easier through continued experience.pp.136）批评相互依赖理论，认为两极世界中相互依赖的程度很低。【185】

第八章 结构性原因与军事效果

在这一章，沃尔兹表明“二”是最好的小数目。【217】两极系统的性质与单极系统和多极系统截然不同，“答案在于自助系统中各行为体所必需采取的行为，即均势行为。在多极系统和两极系统中，均势行为是不同的。”【219】（The answer is found in the behavior required of parties in self-help systems: namely, balancing. Balancing is differently done in multi – and bipolar systems.pp.163）他认为多极系统更灵活，但不确定性大：In multipolar systems there are too many powers to permit any of them to draw clear and fixed lines between allies and adversaries and too few to keep the effects of defection low. With three or more powers flexibility of alliances keeps relations of friendship and enmity fluid and makes everyone's estimate of the present and future relation of forces uncertain. So long as the system is one of fairly small numbers, the actions of any of them may threaten the security of others. There are too many to enable anyone to see for sure what is happening, and too few to make what is happening a matter of indifference.pp.168.

第九章 国际事务管理

沃尔兹首先考察了权力的四种作用：（1）power provides the means of maintaining one's autonomy in the face of force that others wield.（2）greater power permits wider ranges of action, while leaving the outcomes of action uncertain.（3）the more powerful enjoy wider margins of safety in dealing with the less powerful and have more to say about which games will be played and how.pp.194（4）great power gives its possessors a big stake in their system and the ability to act for its sake.pp.195进而，他希望表明国际管理是如何得以实现的，尤其是4“P”问题。他反对相互依赖增强使对国际事务进行中央管理创造了可能的观点，“相互依赖的增强的确增加了对国际事务加以管理的需要，但却无法产生具有管理能力的管理者。从全球或宏观视角来看，美苏两国最需要得到管理。我的力量则将这一视角转变为微观视角。我的理论所解释的问题并非是如何对世界以及世界上的大国进行管理，而是关于大国对国际事务进行建设性的管理的可能性是如何随着系统的变化而变化的。”【284-5】（The increase of interdependence, according to the accepted view, has shrunk the globe and established possibilities for the central management of world affairs. Increased interdependence certainly leads to increased need for the management of collective affairs, but it does not produce a manager capable of doing it. From the global, or macro, perspective, the United States and the Soviet Union most of all need to be managed. Our theory changes the perspective to a micro one. The problem seen in the light of the theory is not to say how to manage the world, including its great powers, but to say how the possibility that great powers will constructively manage international affairs varies as systems change.pp.210）

[1] In defining international-political structures we take states with whatever traditions, habits, objectives, desires, and forms of government they may have. We do not ask whether states are revolutionary or legitimate, authoritarian or democratic, ideological or pragmatic. We abstract from every attribute of states except their capabilities. Nor in thinking about structure do we ask about the relations of states-their feelings of friendship and hostility, their diplomatic exchanges, the alliances they form, and the extent of the contacts and exchanges among them. We ask what range of expectations arises merely from looking at the type of order that prevails among them and at the distribution of capabilities within that order. We abstract from any particular qualities of states and from all of their concrete connections. What emerges is a positional picture, a general description of the ordered overall arrangement of a society written in terms of the placement of units rather than in terms of their qualities.pp.99