English School reading
Hall, Ian (2016). ‘International Theory beyond the Three Traditions: A Student’s Conversation with
Martin Wight’
Overall, the article focuses on Wight’s reconciliation of his earlier approach based on ‘three
traditions’ (Grotian, Kantian and Machiavellian theory) and his later work ‘Why is there no International
Theory?’ which stresses the lack of international political theory.
Key Points:
● Lack of international theory: ‘domestic’ political theory (“doing of and within polis”) vs international
theory (“doing of and within the society of states”
Political theory mostly focused on the domestic matters instead of the world arena -
‘The Republic’ by Plato may have established those limits: ‘the belief that every individual requires the
protection of the state has absorbed almost all the intellectual energy devoted to political study’
● Three traditions vs ‘unit-ideas’ analysis (longitudinal themes
Martin Wight’s theory about three traditions: the Machiavellians, the Grotians and the Kantians, which
resemble the Realists, the Rationalists and the Revolutionists, respectively.
English School concerns itself with the examination of traditional international theory, dividing it into three
sub-subject
- Realism: the concept of the international system
- Rationalism: the concept the international society
- Revolutionism: the concept of world society
The idea of changing ways to approach various concepts through history instead of theoretical traditions. -
‘The questions and answers do change over time, but each answer is shaped by the ways in which past
thinkers approached similar questions.’
There is a kind of continuity in thought of international theorists that is built around similar concepts, like
international society, order, morality, etc.
Instead of trying to classify assumptions, beliefs and arguments found in all of international theory into three
traditions, it may be more practical to analyse international theory according to unit-ideas, speci c
‘longitudinal’ concepts found in works of various scholars and practitioners
● Dominance of realism (+ personal identi cation - though not sure whether it is of any signi cance
Wight’s assumptions about the historical context
1. Changes in international relations brought about by the Cold Wa
2. War is no longer limited by international law
3. Lack of desire to establish balance and cooperation - problems of the United Nation
4. ‘Diplomacy today is more of a shouting match’
5. The ideological challenge posed by the Soviets, whose aim is to reach the collapse of international
society
➔ ‘The fundamentals of international relations remain unchanged, but the desire to sustain the notion
of the ‘society of states’ doesn’t seem to be there.’
‘It is hard to see how Realist ‘power politics’ can be overcome in these circumstances.’
● Scepticism over the role of universities in bringing up practitioners of international relations: not
practical training but rather well-rounded understanding of different theoretical approaches
Three Traditions of International Theory - Wight(1991)
In the 1950’s while some theorists started an observation of international actors’ behavior as well as
statistical analysis of collected data, English school was concentrated on a study of political philosophy,
examining the main traditions of thought about IR in the past. When Wight (1987;1991) argued that these
traditions are realism, rationalism and revolutionalism, according to Bull (1977; 1991) & Porter (1978), they
are also called as Hobbesianism, Grotianism and Kantianism. Wight (1966) claims that international theory
does not provide a uni ed explanation of international phenomena, instead the most fundamental question
in international theory is what international society is. Hence, English school required evaluation of values in
the modern societies of states in order to understand their relationship towards the pursuit of justice in
world politics. Meanwhile, Wight’s contemporary Waltz (1954) used history of thought in IR in a different
1

:
fi s
fi
)
:
)
r
.
s
fi )
fi
Hall, Ian (2016). ‘International Theory beyond the Three Traditions: A Student’s Conversation with
Martin Wight’
Overall, the article focuses on Wight’s reconciliation of his earlier approach based on ‘three
traditions’ (Grotian, Kantian and Machiavellian theory) and his later work ‘Why is there no International
Theory?’ which stresses the lack of international political theory.
Key Points:
● Lack of international theory: ‘domestic’ political theory (“doing of and within polis”) vs international
theory (“doing of and within the society of states”
Political theory mostly focused on the domestic matters instead of the world arena -
‘The Republic’ by Plato may have established those limits: ‘the belief that every individual requires the
protection of the state has absorbed almost all the intellectual energy devoted to political study’
● Three traditions vs ‘unit-ideas’ analysis (longitudinal themes
Martin Wight’s theory about three traditions: the Machiavellians, the Grotians and the Kantians, which
resemble the Realists, the Rationalists and the Revolutionists, respectively.
English School concerns itself with the examination of traditional international theory, dividing it into three
sub-subject
- Realism: the concept of the international system
- Rationalism: the concept the international society
- Revolutionism: the concept of world society
The idea of changing ways to approach various concepts through history instead of theoretical traditions. -
‘The questions and answers do change over time, but each answer is shaped by the ways in which past
thinkers approached similar questions.’
There is a kind of continuity in thought of international theorists that is built around similar concepts, like
international society, order, morality, etc.
Instead of trying to classify assumptions, beliefs and arguments found in all of international theory into three
traditions, it may be more practical to analyse international theory according to unit-ideas, speci c
‘longitudinal’ concepts found in works of various scholars and practitioners
● Dominance of realism (+ personal identi cation - though not sure whether it is of any signi cance
Wight’s assumptions about the historical context
1. Changes in international relations brought about by the Cold Wa
2. War is no longer limited by international law
3. Lack of desire to establish balance and cooperation - problems of the United Nation
4. ‘Diplomacy today is more of a shouting match’
5. The ideological challenge posed by the Soviets, whose aim is to reach the collapse of international
society
➔ ‘The fundamentals of international relations remain unchanged, but the desire to sustain the notion
of the ‘society of states’ doesn’t seem to be there.’
‘It is hard to see how Realist ‘power politics’ can be overcome in these circumstances.’
● Scepticism over the role of universities in bringing up practitioners of international relations: not
practical training but rather well-rounded understanding of different theoretical approaches
Three Traditions of International Theory - Wight(1991)
In the 1950’s while some theorists started an observation of international actors’ behavior as well as
statistical analysis of collected data, English school was concentrated on a study of political philosophy,
examining the main traditions of thought about IR in the past. When Wight (1987;1991) argued that these
traditions are realism, rationalism and revolutionalism, according to Bull (1977; 1991) & Porter (1978), they
are also called as Hobbesianism, Grotianism and Kantianism. Wight (1966) claims that international theory
does not provide a uni ed explanation of international phenomena, instead the most fundamental question
in international theory is what international society is. Hence, English school required evaluation of values in
the modern societies of states in order to understand their relationship towards the pursuit of justice in
world politics. Meanwhile, Wight’s contemporary Waltz (1954) used history of thought in IR in a different
1

:
fi s
fi
)
:
)
r
.
s
fi )
fi
