Metaphor and conceptual power approaches in international relations
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61710/fs68gq71Abstract
Power phenomena has attached to the war phenomena along the history and its central rule which it plays in the field of the international relations, but the change in the international system environment consistently led to the change in the war nature and its function. In the 21th century, the countries looked forward to dominate or to withdraw of it. As a result, to change the concept and what is the power and what is it function in the international relations.
Because of that dilemmas philosophy of the concepts in the international relations initially consider as linguistics and ideological problems. These dilemmas reflected on the form and the contents of the power definitions. So, because of the ambiguity is the fundamental characteristic of the power phenomena which is reflected on the understanding of the international relations until it became to get rid of the ambiguity is a necessity rather than a need. The ambiguity which surrounds the power phenomena is come from its international nature, in another words, it isn’t confined on solo society and culture. As an aim to get rid of this ambiguity the researchers adopted the linguistics metaphor to clarify and simplify its meanings, but that increased its ambiguity when these clarification among the societies with different languages which make it vary conceptual approaches as a natural result.
References
Robert A Dahl. (1957). The Concept of Powe. Behavioural Science، 2(3)، 201-215.
Alan Bradshaw. (1976). A Critique of Steven Lukes Power: A Radical View. British Sociology Association، 10(1)، 121-127.
David Sammon. (2008). Understanding Non-Decision Making. تأليف Adam Frederic، و Patrick Humphreys، Encyclopedia of decision making and decision support technologies (الصفحات 910-915). New York: Information Science Reference.
Doreen McCalla-Chen. (2000). Towards an Understanding of the Concept of Non-Decision Making and its Manifestation in the School Sector. Educational Management Administration & Leadership، 28(1)، 33-46.
Haluk Ozdemir. (2008). Uluslararaiı İliskilerde Guc: cok Boyutlu Bir Degerlendirmei. Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergis، 63(3)، 113-144.
hamit erdal. (2012). Uluslararası İlişkiler Kavram ve Olaylar Sözlüğü. ankara: baris kitap.
Jeff Vail. (2004). A Theory of Power. New York: iUniverse Inc.
jeffrey Hart. (1976). Three Approaches to The Measurement of Power in International Relations. International Organization، 30(2)، 289-303.
John Locke. (1975). an Essay Concerning Human Understanding. (Peter H. Nidditch، المحرر) Oxford Clarendon Press.
Joseph S. Nye Jr. (1990). The Changing Nature of World Power. Political Science Quarterly، 105(2)، 177-192.
Keith Dowding. (2006). Three-Dimensional Power: A Discussion of Steven Lukes’ Power: A Radical View. Political Studies Review، 4(2)، 136-145.
Leonard Krieger. (1968). Power and Responsibility: The Historical Assumptions. تأليف Leonard Krieger، و Fritz Stern، The Responsibility of Power (الصفحات 3-33). london، uk: Springer.
Nelson W. Polsby. (1968). The Study of Community Power. USA: Macmillan.
Paul Edwards. (2006). Power and İdeology in the Workplace: Going beyond Even the Second Version of the Three-Dimensional View. Work Employment and Society، 20(3)، 571-581.
Peter Bachrach، و Morton Baratz. (1962). Two Faces of Power. American Political Science Review، 56(4)، 947- 952.
Peter Morriss. (2006). Steven Lukes on the Concept of Power. Political Studies Review، 4(2)، 124-135.
Robert A. Dahl. (1968). Power. تأليف David L. Sills، و David L. Sills (المحرر)، International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences (المجلد 12، الصفحات 405-415). USA: The Macmillan Company & The Free Press.
Robert O. Keohane، و Joseph S. Nye Jr. (1998). Power and Interdependence in the İnformation Age. Foreign Affairs، 77(5)، 81-94.
Steven Lukes. (2005). Power: A Radical View (الإصدار 2). london، uk: Palgrave Macmillan.
Steven Lukes. (2002). Power and agency. British Journal of Sociology، 53(3)، 491-496.
Thomas Hobbes . (2007). Leviathan (الإصدار 6). (semih lim، المترجمون) istanbul: yapi kredi yayinlari.
Zoltan Kovecses. (2010). Metaphor: A practical introduction. usa: oxford university.
احمد داود اوغلو. (2010). العمق الاستراتيجي: موقع تركيا ودورها في الساحة الدولية. (محمد جابر ثلجي، و طارق عبد الجليل، المترجمون) بيروت: الدار العربية للعلوم.
تيري ل. ديبيل. (2009). استراتيجية الشؤون الخارجية: منطق الحكم الأمريكي. (وليد شهيد، المترجمون) بيروت: دار الكتاب العربي.
خضر عباس عطوان. (2009). القوة العالمية والتوازنات الاقليمية. عمان: دار اسامة للنشر والتوزيع.
ريتشارد ليتل. (2009). توازن القوى في العلاقات الدولية: الاستعارات والاساطير والنماذج. (هاني تيبري، المترجمون) بيروت، لبنان: دار الكتاب العربي.
علي حسين العصامي. (2019). القوة المدركة والتنافس الأمريكي الصيني في عالم مابعد كوفيد 19. The college of law and political science journal، 13.
همام عبدالكاظم الجرياوي، و علي حسين العصامي. (2022). الانسحاب الامريكي من افغانستان بين الاطروحتين الواقعية والبنائي. Journal of Imam Al-Kadhum College، 6(3).
Downloads
Published
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Journal of Imam Al-Kadhum College
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
