Published online by Cambridge University Press: 26 October 2009
Martin Wight once claimed there was no international political theory worthy of the name. In this I believe he was mistaken. But he also maintained, as Benedict Kingsbury and Adam Roberts put it, that ‘the most fundamental question you can ask in international theory is, What is international society? Hedley Bull likewise drew a basic distinction, as several contributors to the volume edited by J. D. B. Miller and the late R. J. Vincent remind us, between the system of states and the society of states. Each of these volumes takes up Wight's question and explores Bull's distinction in various ways, most of them engaging and enlightening. For an overview of the main approaches and controversies in the study of normative international relations today one could scarcely do better than consult them.
1 Williams, Bernard, Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy (London, 1985).Google Scholar
2 See Oakeshott, Michael, On Human Conduct (Oxford, 1975), part I.Google Scholar
3 Collingwood, R. G., The New Leviathan: Man, Society, Civilization and Barbarism (New York, 1971).Google Scholar
4 Lauterpacht, H., ‘The Grotian Tradition in International Law’, British Yearbook of International Law 1946, pp. 1–53Google Scholar and Bull, H., ‘The Grotian Conception of International Society’, in Butterfield, H. and Wight, M. (eds.), Diplomatic Investigations (London, 1966), pp. 51–73.Google Scholar
5 Bull, Hedley, ‘Recapturin g the Just War for Political Theory’, World Politics, 31 (1979), p. 121 (emphasis added).CrossRefGoogle ScholarBerlin, Isaiah, The Crooked Timber of Humanity (London, 1990).Google Scholar
6 Berlin, Isaiah, The Crooked Timber of Humanity (London, 1990).Google Scholar