中国国际关系学科发展导向及其反思
Return to the Library

Development Orientation and Reflection of China’s International Relations Discipline

中国国际关系学科发展导向及其反思

China’s renowned international affairs scholar, Yan Xuetong, delivered this speech at the 14th Annual Meeting of Chinese Community of Political Science and International Studies, where he criticized the trajectory of China’s international relations discipline towards viral content rather than in-depth study based on scientific methodology.


FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailPrintCopy Link
Original text
PDF
English text
PDF
See an error? Drop us a line at
View the translated and original text side-by-side

Since the reform and opening-up, China’s international relations research has gone through decades of development and has now entered a brand-new stage. Nowadays, the world is undergoing major changes unseen in a century, and relevant discipline development is constantly adapting to the great changes of the times. How to scientifically and accurately understand the development trend of China’s international relations discipline, promote the return of fundamental and theoretical research on international relations, and continuously enhance the scientific level of the discipline has become important problems that need to be solved urgently for colleagues in China’s international relations academic communities.

自改革开放以来,中国国际关系研究走过几十年的发展道路,目前已进入一个崭新的阶段。当今世界正经历百年未有之大变局,相应的学科发展也在不断适应时代的巨变。如何科学、准确地认识中国国际关系学科发展的趋势,推动国际关系研究的基础性和理论性回归,不断增强学科的科学化水平,已经是摆在我国国际关系学界同仁面前亟须解决的重要问题。

The Motive Force for the Development of International Relations Discipline

国际关系学科的发展动力

There are two major driving forces for the development of disciplines. The first is the natural growth of knowledge, which means the increase of knowledge would continuously form new disciplines. For example, classical physics was first developed, then relativistic astrophysics and quantum mechanics. With the acquisition and increase of new knowledge, new disciplines are born. The path of knowledge accumulation can be divided into two patterns: First, with continuous development, disciplines are subdivided into many different branches. For example, after physics and chemistry become two disciplines, chemistry is divided into polymer chemistry, organic chemistry, inorganic chemistry, and so on. The other pattern is interdisciplinary integration into a new discipline. For example, physics and chemistry are integrated into the physicochemical subject. The second is to promote the development of new disciplines under human guidance, which can also be divided into two types. One is guided by the government. For example, in the first decade of the 21st century, China’s Marxist theory was designated (by the government) as a first-level discipline, no longer being a second-level discipline under the first-level discipline of political science. The other is guided by the academic community. For example, to promote international and regional studies in the New Era, a group of academic pacemakers and young or middle-aged “backbone teachers” are working hard to make it a [government-designated] first-level discipline.

学科的发展有两大动力。第一是知识的自然增长,即知识的叠加会不断形成新学科。例如,先有经典物理学知识,后发展出相对论天体物理学,再发展出量子物理力学。随着新知识的获取与增加,新学科由此诞生。知识积累的路径又可以分为两种:一种是伴随着学科不断发展,细化出分支小学科,如物理与化学成为两个学科后,化学又分化出高分子化学、有机化学、无机化学等。另一种是跨学科融合成一个新学科。例如,物理学和化学融合,形成了物化专业。第二是人为引导推动新学科发展。人为引导也可分为两种。一种是由政府引导。例如,21世纪前10年,中国的马克思主义理论从原来政治学下属的二级学科分离出来,设为一级学科。另一种是学界引导。例如,围绕新时代国别区域研究的推进,一批学界带头人、中青年骨干教师正在为国别区域研究成立一级学科而努力奋斗。

The development of international relations discipline is the result of these two driving forces. In addition, the development of a discipline is inseparable from the promotion of scientific methods. Historical experience shows that only by adhering to scientific methods can we defeat regression in the real world and promote academic progress. At present, mankind has entered an era of “uneasy peace”, that is, a world without war but full of fear because people have a new understanding of the uncertainty of international politics. In this context, big data provides more possibilities for exploring new research paths and methods for international relations research. The concept of the big data research method is that we don’t need to know what the causal relationship is, and we don’t need to pay attention to how uncertain things are, but exhaust all the data to reach the conclusion directly. Therefore, in terms of scientific methods, it is appropriate to take an open mind to it rather than deny it. International issues on different levels can be studied by different methods, and what is important is to improve the reliability of research methods.

国际关系学科的发展就是受到这两种动力影响的结果。此外,一个学科的发展还离不开科学方法的推动。历史经验表明,只有坚持科学方法才能击败现实世界中倒退的阻力,推动学术进步。当前人类进入了“不安的和平时代”(uneasy peace),即没有战争但充满恐惧的世界,原因是人们对国际政治的不确定性有了新的认识。在此背景下,大数据为国际关系研究拓展新的研究路径和方法提供了更多可能。大数据研究方法的理念是,不需要知道因果原理是什么,也不用关注事物变化的不确定性有多强,而是穷尽所有数据直接到达结论层面。因此,对待科学方法不宜以一种观念否定另一种观念,而应秉持开放的心态。不同层面的国际问题本就可以运用不同方法来研究,重要的是提高研究方法的可靠性。

Four Judgments on the Development Trend of China’s International Relations Discipline

对中国国际关系学科发展趋势的四个判断

The development of China’s international relations discipline has shown the following four trends:

中国国际关系学科发展已经显现出以下四个趋势。

First, basic and theoretical research is being weakened. Among the keynote discussion topics of the 14th Annual Meeting of the Chinese Community of Political Science and International Studies in 2021, there are fewer discussion topics on international relations theories, international relations database construction, and basic theories. As far as the publication of academic journals is concerned, articles published in academic journals on international relations have increased, but intellectual innovation has decreased. The main reason is that there are more policy-oriented studies, and the innovation by policy-oriented articles lies not in knowledge-based innovation, but in the practicality of solving specific problems. However, basic research can often explore the mechanism and principle behind issues and can form a profound theoretical exposition of research problems, thus having a great impact on disciplines. When a hot international issue or an urgent problem is solved, those policy suggestions become “antiques”. If there are more scholars in policy studies, there will be fewer scholars creating academic knowledge, which leads to a decrease in the amount of knowledge created.

第一,基础性和理论性研究正在被弱化。从2021年第十四届政治学与国际关系学术共同体年会的小组主旨讨论题目看,有关国际关系理论、国际关系数据库建设、基础理论的讨论题目少了。从学术期刊的发行来说,现阶段国际关系学术期刊文章的发表量增大了,但其知识创新减少了。究其原因,主要是政策性研究多了,而政策性文章的创新点并不在于创新知识,而在于解决具体问题的实用性。但基础性研究往往可以探究事务背后的机制与原理,能够对研究问题形成深刻的学理阐述,并因此对学科产生重大影响。当一个热点国际问题或亟须解决的当下问题得以解决后,那些政策建议就成了“古董”。政策性研究的学者多了,创造学术知识的学者就少了,导致创造出来的知识量也随之减少。

Second, the return of the tendency to oppose using scientific methods to study international relations. Whether the scientific method is based on classical physics, quantum mechanics, big data, or other scientific knowledge, using them to study international relations can improve the scientific level of this discipline. The current trend against scientific research methods has picked up. Some academic journals at leading universities on international relations have published successive articles criticizing the scientific approach to the study of international relations, saying that the scientific approach has multiple flaws. The scientific approach certainly has flaws, because every research method has flaws. However, compared with traditional research approaches, the scientific approach has two advantages. One is that it has fewer flaws than the former, and the other is that it can be improved continuously. The scientific approach can avoid many inherent flaws of traditional approaches, mainly the issue of unreliability. In fact, to oppose the scientific methods of studying international relations is to oppose the improvement of research methods and the scientification of international relations research.

第二,反对用科学方法研究国际关系的趋势回潮。无论是基于经典物理学、量子力学,还是大数据等的科学方法,将它们借鉴过来研究国际关系都能提高本学科的科学化水平。但是当前反对科学研究方法的趋势回升了。有的著名大学的国际关系学术杂志连续发表文章批评用科学方法研究国际关系,说科学方法有多种缺陷。科学方法肯定有缺陷,因为任何研究方法都有缺陷。但是相比传统研究方法,科学方法有两个优点,一是其缺陷比后者少,二是可以不断改进。科学方法可以避免传统方法固有的许多缺陷,主要是不可靠的问题。事实上,反对用科学方法研究国际关系就是反对改进研究方法,反对国际关系研究科学化。

Third, the admissions threshold is decreasing, the level of professional education declining, and the market for errors is increasing. For example, the admissions threshold to international relations majors for undergraduates is lowering. International relations has low entry scores compared with other majors. Also, in the postgraduate entrance examinations, the specialization of examination questions has decreased, with less examination of the fundamentals of the discipline. International relations teachers are emphasizing professionalism less and expressing their views more in other areas. All of the above practices are lowering the bar for international relations majors.

第三,国际关系专业门槛不断降低,专业教育水平下降,错误认知的市场扩大。例如,国际关系本科专业的招生门槛在降低,与其他专业相比是低分录取专业。研究生招生考试的试题专业化程度下降,对本学科基本原理的考察有所减少。国际关系教师强调专业精神的少了,跨界发表看法的多了。上述这些做法都在降低国际关系专业的门槛。

Fourth, judging academic achievements by standards in the society rather than academic standards. Online articles that are read over 100,000 times on WeChat have become equivalent to Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) articles, which is equaling online celebrity to the level of academic status. Online celebrity is the result of the market of public opinion with divergent thinking, and many related articles are imaginary without an objective basis. In fact, innovation is based on the formation of correctly divergent and convergent thinking. Divergent thinking can help scholars transcend the constraints of existing knowledge and form infinite answers or opinions, but it depends on convergent thinking to eliminate all unreasonable answers and scientifically test several answers that have not been excluded. Replacing academic standards with influence in the society leads to regarding the divergent thinking within the current “online celebrity” articles as innovation, which is a subjective imagination.

第四,以社会标准而非学术标准判断学术成就。“10万+”的网评等同于SSCI文章,将“网红”程度视为学术地位的高低。“网红”是发散思维舆论市场的结果,相关文章很多是没有客观依据的天马行空的想象。事实上,只有形成正确的发散与收敛思维才属于创新,发散思维能帮助学者超越现有知识的约束,形成无限的答案或看法,但这还要靠收敛思维排除掉所有不合理的答案,并对未排除的几个答案进行科学检验。由于以社会影响取代学术标准,将时下的“网红”文章的发散思维当成创新,这是主观臆想。

Four Suggestions on China’s International Relations Studies

对中国国际关系学研究的四个建议

China’s international relations studies have gone through decades of development. In view of its existing problems, the following four suggestions are put forward.

中国国际关系研究已经走过几十年的发展道路。针对其中出现的问题,提出以下四个建议。

First, more research on academic subjects, fewer policy recommendations. Foreign policy is formulated by the state’s decision-makers. Ordinary people don’t understand the specific landscape of diplomacy, so their policy suggestions are unlikely to be operatable. Scholars should devote their energies to academic studies, aka facts and reasoning, which have strong vitality; the outcomes of policy research are only applied to specific issues, which is short-lived. In order to gain strong academic vitality and lay a solid foundation for policymaking, it is suggested that we should do more basic academic research and make fewer policy suggestions.

第一,多研究原理,少提政策建议。外交政策是由国家决策者制定的,普通人对于外交的具体情况不了解,提出的政策建议是不可能有可操作性的。学者应把精力用于研究学理性的问题。从事学理性的研究就是研究事实,研究道理。这种研究成果生命力强,而政策研究成果事过境迁,生命力短。为了获得学术的强大生命力,更好成为政策制定的坚实基础,建议大家多做基础学术研究,少提政策建议。

Second, learn more about what you cannot do, and object less to what you don’t understand. The premise of academic opposition is to knowledge on the subject to which you object. For example, the premise of objections to the quantitative analysis method should have been that you have mastered this method. Nowadays, some people are critical of academic achievements they cannot understand. This practice of opposing what you don’t understand is a symptom of ignorance. There are two possibilities if you can’t understand something: one is that the person who wrote it was wrong; the other is that readers lack the professional knowledge and ability to understand, and the latter happens frequently. Researchers need to first learn what they can’t do and what they don’t understand, so as to increase their existing knowledge.

第二,多学习不会的,少反对不懂的。学术上反对任何事的前提是知晓反对的对象是什么。反对定量分析方法的前提是掌握定量分析方法。现在有些人对自己看不懂的学术成果大加批判。这种看不懂就反对的做法是无知的表现。看不懂有两种可能:一种是写的人错了;另一种是读者缺乏读懂的专业知识能力,后一种情况居多。研究者需要先学习自己不会的和不懂的,这样才能提高和改善已有的知识。

Third, pursue more professional studies and indulge less in commentaries on current affairs. There is a division of labor in society; commentaries on current events are mainly the work of journalists, and the work of scholars is mainly to study academic issues, write academic articles, write books, write textbooks, and build databases. At present, in the international relations community, there are few scholars who build databases and few teachers who write textbooks. International relations scholars should devote more energy and time to their own work.

第三,多追求专业的,少沉迷于时评的。社会有分工,写国际时评主要是记者的工作,学者的工作主要是研究学理性的问题、写学术文章、写著作、编教材、建数据库。当前,在国际关系学界,做数据库工作的学者寥寥无几,编写教材的老师也不多。国际关系学者应该把更多精力和时间用于本职工作。

Fourth, uphold academic standards more and care less about online feedback. Measuring academic development by online feedback has a certain reference value, but it cannot be taken as an absolute or even the main standard. Academic research needs to have its own professional standards in evaluations, and by testing our results more through academic standards, the academic level will continue to improve.

第四,多信奉学术标准,少在意网络评价标准。以网络反响衡量学术发展有一定的参考价值,但不能作为绝对甚至主要标准。学术研究需要有自己的专业性判断标准,多以学术标准检验我们的成果,学术水平就会不断提高。

To top

Cite This Page

阎学通 (Yan Xuetong). "Development Orientation and Reflection of China's International Relations Discipline [中国国际关系学科发展导向及其反思]". CSIS Interpret: China, original work published in Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS) [中国社会科学院], October 14, 2021

FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailPrintCopy Link