Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-xm8r8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-08T05:13:04.417Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Conceptualizing humanity in the English School

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 April 2016

Adrian Gallagher
Adrian Gallagher*
Affiliation:
Department of Politics and International Studies, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
*
E-mail: A.Gallagher@leeds.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The article advances three options to create new ways for thinking about humanity. First, reject humanity and view interconnectedness as state centric rather than human centric, with international law upheld as the bedrock institution of international society. Second, thin humanity puts forward a reductionist view that the value of humankind lies in the human worth of its members – human beings. In short, humanity is the sum of its parts. Third, thick humanity, which views humankind as an independent value in its own right. From this perspective, the value of humanity lies in its ubiquity, which reveals that it is not just more, it is different, to the sum of its parts. It is important to note that this is not a purely theoretical issue. One’s view of humanity shapes one’s view of whether citizens of one state should care for the citizens of another, which lies at the heart of contemporary debates over issues such as the responsibility to protect, human security, and redistributive justice. In so doing, the article speaks to broader debates on humanity that reflects the need for greater interdisciplinary research in the future.

Keywords

the English Schoolhumanityreject humanitythin humanitythick humanity
Type
Original Papers
Information
International Theory , Volume 8 , Issue 2 , July 2016 , pp. 341 - 364
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, Philip Warren. 1972. “More is Different.” Science 177(4047):393–396.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arbour, Louise. 2008. “The Responsibility to Protect as a Duty of Care in International Law & Practice.” Review of International Studies 34(3):445–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bain, William. 2007. “One Order, Two Laws: Recovering the ‘Normative’ in English School Theory.” Review of International Studies 33(4):557–575.Google Scholar
Barnett, Michael. 2010. The International Humanitarian Order. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Barnett, Michael 2011. Empire of Humanity: A History of Humanitarianism. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Barnett, Michael, and Weiss, Thomas. 2011. Humanitarianism Contested: Where Angels Fear to Tread. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bauman, Zygmunt. 1989. Modernity and the Holocaust. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Behr, Hartmut, and Rosh, Felix, eds. 2012. Hans Morgenthau, The Concept of the Political. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Bellamy, Alex. J. 2009. Responsibility to Protect. Polity: The Global Effort to End Mass Atrocity. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Bellamy, Alex. J. 2015. The Responsibility to Protect: A Defence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bellamy, Alex, and Reike, Ruben. 2010. “The Responsibility to Protect and International Law.” Global Responsibility to Protect 2(3):267–286.Google Scholar
Berlin, Isaiah. 1998. The Crooked Timber of Humanity. Princeton, NJ, USA: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Booth, Ken. 2007. Theory of World Security. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Booth, Ken 2014. International Relations: All That Matters. London: Hodder Press.Google Scholar
Booth, Ken 2016. “The Responsibility to Protect Ten Years on from the World Summit.” International Politics 51(1, Special Issue):1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BroadCharlie, D. Charlie, D. 2013 [1923]. The Mind and its Place in Nature. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Brown., Garrett. W. 2010. “Moving from Cosmopolitan Legal Theory to Legal Practice: Models of Cosmopolitan Law.” In The Cosmopolitan Reader, edited by Garrett W. Brown and David Held, 248–266. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Bull, Hedley. 1982. “The West and South Africa.” Daedalus 111(2):255–270.Google Scholar
Bull, Hedley 2002. The Anarchical Society, A Study of World Order Politics, 3rd ed. London: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Buzan, Barry. 2004. From International Society to World Society? English School Theory and the Social Structure of Globalisation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Byers, Michael. 1999. Custom, Power and the Power of Rules. Cambrdige: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, Ian. 2014. The Vulnerable in International Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cunliffe, Philip. 2010. “Dangerous Duties: Power, Paternalism, and the ‘Responsibility to Protect.” Review of International Studies 36:79–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donnelly, Jack. 2003. Universal Human Rights: In Theory and Practice. London: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Donnelly, Jack 2015. “Normative Versus Taxonomic Humanity: Varieties of Human Dignity in the Western Tradition.” Journal of Human Rights 12(1):1–22.Google Scholar
Dunne, Tim. 1998. Inventing International Society: History of the English School. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Dunne, Tim 2013. “Taking Liberalism on Intervention Seriously: A 12-Step Program.” The Duck of Minerva. Accessed May 29. http://www.whiteoliphaunt.com/duckofminerva/2013/05/taking-liberalism-on-intervention-seriously-a-12-step-program.html.Google Scholar
Düwell, Marcus. 2014. “Human Dignity: Concepts, Discussions, Philosophical Perspectives.” In The Cambridge Handbook of Human Dignity: Interdisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Marcus Düwell, Jens Braarvig, Roger Brownsword, and Dietmar Mieth, 23–52. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Düwell, Marcus, Braarvig, Jens, Brownsword, Roger, and Mieth, Dietmar, eds. 2014. The Cambridge Handbook of Human Dignity: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaita, Raimond. 2000. A Common Humanity: Thinking About Love Truth and Justice. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gallagher, Adrian. 2013. Genocide and its Threat to Contemporary International Order. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallagher, Adrian, and Brown, Garrett W., eds. 2016. “Special Issue: The Responsibility to Protect Ten Years on from the World Summit.” International Politics 51(1):8–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallie, Walter Bryce. 1955–56. “Essentially Contested Concepts.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 56:167–198.Google Scholar
Geras, Norman. 2005. “Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity.” In Genocide and Human Rights, edited by John K. Roth, 167–181. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glover, Johnathan. 2001. Humanity, a Moral History of the Twentieth Century. London: Pimlico.Google Scholar
Habermas, Juergen. 2010. “A Political Constitution for the Pluralist World Society?” In The Cosmopolitan Reader, edited by Garrett. W. Brown and David Held, 67–288. New York: Polity.Google Scholar
Hall, Ian. 2006. The International Thought of Martin Wight. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hehir, Aidan. 2011. “The Responsibility to Protect and International Law.” In Critical Perspectives on the Responsibility to Protect, edited by P. Cunliffe, 84–100. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Herzen, Alexander. 1982. My Past and Thoughts, (Translated by Constance Garnett). London: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Hurd, Ian. 2011. “Is Humanitarian Intervention Legal? The Rule of Law in an Incoherent World.” Journal of Ethics and International Affairs 23(3):293–313.Google Scholar
Hurrell, Andrew. 2007. On Global Order, Power, Values and the Constitution of International Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Jackson, Robert. 2000. The Global Covenant, Human Conduct in a World of States. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Jackson, Robert 2006. “Human Rights Protection in a World of Sovereign States.” In Between Cosmopolitan Ideals and State Sovereignty, edited by Ronald Tinnevelt and Gert Verschraen, 135–147. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaidesoja, Tuukka. 2009. “Bhaskar and Bunge on Social Emergence.” Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 39(3):300–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keane, Fergal. 1995. Season of Blood, A Rwandan Journey. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Koskenniemi, Martti. 2012. “Humanity’s Law by Ruti G. Teitel.” Ethics and International Affairs 26(3):395–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krieken Van, Robert. 1998. Norbert Elias. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lemkin, Raphael. 2005. Axis Rule in Occupied Europe: Laws of Occupation, Analysis of Government, Proposals for Redress. New Jersey: Lawbook Exchange Ltd.Google Scholar
Levene, Mark. 2005. Genocide in the Age of the Nation State, I: The Meaning of Genocide. London: I. B. Tauris.Google Scholar
Linklater, Andrew. 1998. The Transformation of Political Community: Ethical Foundations of the Post-Westphalian Era. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Linklater, Andrew 2007. Critical Theory and World Politics: Citizenship, Sovereignty and Humanity. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Linklater, Andrew 2009. “Human Interconnectedness.” International Relations 23(3):481–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linklater, Andrew 2011a. The Problem of Harm in World Politics. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linklater, Andrew 2011b. “Prudence and Principle in International Society: Reflections on Vincent’s Approach to Human Rights.” International Affairs 87(5):1179–1191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linklater, Andrew, and Suganami, Hidemi. 2006. The English School of International Relations, a Contemporary Reassessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luban, David. 2010. “Carl Schmitt and the Critique of Lawfare.” Case Western Journal of International Law 43(1–2):457–471.Google Scholar
Mayall, James. 2000. World Politics: Progress and its Limits. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Mayroz, Eyal. 2008. “Ever Again? The United States, Genocide Suppression, and the Crisis in Darfur.” The Journal of Genocide Research 10(3):359–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nussbaum, Martha C. 1993. “Non-Relative Virtues: An Aristotelian Approach.” In The Quality of Life, edited by Martha C. Nussbaum and Amartya Sen, 242–269. New York: Clarendon.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nussbaum, Martha C. 1997. Cultivating Humanity: A Classical Defense of Reform in Liberal Education. London: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Onions, Charles T. ed. 1973. The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary on Historical Principles: Volume One A-Markworthy. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Pinker, Steven. 2011. The Better Angels of our Nature: A History of Violence and Humanity. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Power, Samantha. 2003. A Problem from Hell, America and the Age of Genocide. London: Flamingo.Google Scholar
Ralph, Jason. 2014. “The Liberal State in International Society: Interpreting Recent British Foreign Policy.” International Relations 28(11):3–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reinhold, Theresa. 2010. “The Responsibility to Protect: Much Ado About Nothing.” Review of International Studies 36(S1):55–78.Google Scholar
Rengger, Nicholas J. 2006. “Seeing (Double) in the Darkness: The Moral Vision of the Anarchical Society.” In The Anarchical Society in a Globalized World, edited by Richard Little and John Williams, 35–50. New York: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Rengger, Nicholas J. 2011. “The World Turned Upside Down? Human Rights and International Relations After 25 Years.” International Affairs 87(5):1159–1178.Google Scholar
Report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS). 2001. The Responsibility to Protect. Ottawa: International Development Research Centre.Google Scholar
Sawyer, Keith R. 2002. “Durkheim’s Dilemma, Toward a Sociology of Emergence.” Sociological Theory 20:227–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sawyer, Keith R. 2005. Social Emergence: Societies as Complex Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schachter, Oscar. 1983. “Human Dignity as a Normative Concept.” The American Journal of International Law 77(4):848–854.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SchwellerRandall, L. Randall, L. 1999. “Fantasy Theory.” Review of International Studies 25(1):147–150.Google Scholar
Shapcott, Richard. 2008. “Anti-Cosmopolitanism, Pluralism and the Cosmopolitan Harm Principle.” Review of International Studies 34(2):185–205.Google Scholar
Shue, Henry. 2006. “Limiting Sovereignty.” In Humanitarian Intervention in International Relations, edited by Jennifer Welsh, 11–28. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Snidal, Duncan, and Wendt, Alexander. 2009. “Why There is International Theory Now.” International Theory 1(1):1–14.Google Scholar
Teitel, Ruti. 2011. Humanity’s Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Vincent, Andrew. 2010. The Politics of Human Rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Vincent, Raymond J. 1986. Human Rights in International Relations. London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Walzer, M. 1983. Spheres of Justice: A Defence of Pluralism and Equality. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Walzer, M. 1992. Just and Unjust Wars a Moral Argument with Historical Illustrations, 2nd ed. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Walzer, M. 1994. Thick and Thin Moral Argument at Home and Abroad. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weinert, Matthew. 2011. “Reframing the Pluralist-Solidarist Divide.” Millennium: Journal of International Studies 40(1):21–41.Google Scholar
Weinert, Matthew 2015. Making Human: World Order and the Global Governance of Human Dignity. United States of America: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Welsh, Jennifer. 2011. “A Normative Case for Pluralism: Reassessing Vincent’s Views on Humanitarian Intervention.” International Affairs 87(5):1193–1204.Google Scholar
Wendt, Alexander. 1999. Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Westerman, C. Pauline. 2014. “Natural rights versus human dignity: two conflicting in traditions.” In The Cambridge Handbook of Human Dignity: Interdisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Düwell Marcus, Jens Braarvig, Roger Brownsword and Dietmar Mieth, 108–116. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wheeler, Nicholas J. 1992. “Pluralist and Solidarist Conceptions of International Society: Bull and Vincent on Humanitarian Intervention.” Millennium: Journal of International Studies 21(3):463–487.Google Scholar
Wheeler, Nicholas J. 2000. Saving Strangers: Humanitarian Intervention in International Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wheeler, Nicholas J. 2005. “A Victory for Common Humanity? The Responsibility to Protect After the 2005 World Summit.” Journal of International Law and International Relations 2(1):95–105.Google Scholar
Wight, Martin. 1992. International Theory, The Three Traditions, edited by Gabriele Wight and Brian Porter. New York: Holmes and Meir.Google Scholar
Williams, John. 2005. “Pluralism, Solidarism and the Emergence of World Society in English School Theory.” International Relations 19(1):19–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, John 2015. Ethics, Diversity and World Politics: Saving Pluralism from Itself? Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, A. Richard, and Brown, Richard D., eds. 2009. Humanitarianism and Suffering: The Mobilization of Empathy. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Zhang, Qianfan. 2000. “The Idea of Human Dignity in Classical Chinese Philosophy: A Reconstruction of Confucianism.” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 27(3):299–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, Qianfan 2007. “Human Dignity in Classical Chinese Philosophy: Reinterpreting Mohism.” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 34(2):239–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, Qianfan 2014. “Human Dignity in Classical Chinese Philosophy: The Daoist Perspective.” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 40(3–4):493–510.Google Scholar