Authorised by Academic Registrar, April 1996
Synopsis For many years, international theorists failed to give sufficient weight to the obvious fact that there is not one conception of international relations subdivided into different theories and approaches, but at least three separate conceptions of the subject. Although scholars are increasingly prepared to recognise the `threeness' of international theory, there is no consensus about what to call them, how we should describe them and why we should want to study them. This subject attempts to fill this lacuna. It examines the views of the proponents of the three conceptions for understanding the theory and practice of international relations. It will also focus on rival views of such issues as the future of the state, the state system, and possibility of radically different world orders. Finally, the subject considers several topics: human nature, history and ethics, which, it is claimed, are relevant to the development of any revised version of international theory and about which there is considerable controversy. The subject aims mainly to uncover, and critically examine, the leading assumptions and presuppositions of these three conceptions of international relations and to suggest the sorts of questions which need to be raised by anyone interested in sustaining the validity of one of them or in proposing an alternative conception.
Assessment Written (3000 words): 50% + Examination (3 hours): 50%