Examples of exam questions
1. Two paradigmatic views on human nature and violence have been presented by resp.
Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau.
a. What is their respective view on human nature? (4 pts)
b. Which of these views comes closest to Stephen Pinkers position and what does Pinker
give as empirical evidence for that? (6 pts)
2. Two opposing views on the world of international relations have been presented by
Fukuyama and Huntington.
Explain both views and give two arguments in favor of the one view and two
arguments in favor of the other, based on developments in the contemporary world.
3. What is Marx’ view on conflicts? Illustrate this by imaging how a Marxist would look
at contemporary Islamic terrorism.
4. What are, according to Elshtain and Tutu, the key characteristics of the process as
organized by the Truth& Reconciliation Committee (TRC) and why was this process in
their view necessary and appropriate? (4 points)
,Which, if any, of the approaches presented today, can be applicable to the conflict? Are there perhaps
any preconditions that allow or block the application in this context - from what you know about the
conflict?
Judith Butler: the Force of Nonviolence
Butler challenges traditional definitions of violence, urging us to reconsider how violence operates
not just in physical terms but through social and systemic structures. She argues that violence is not
simply an interaction between two opposing individuals but often involves broader, more insidious
systems such as racism and state power.
Butler advocates for a form of nonviolence that moves beyond individual moral choices to
collective action aimed at dismantling structural inequalities.
Systemic Butler argues that violence can exist in hidden or Eg Israel-Palestine
violence and systemic forms, particularly relevant in conflicts marked
structural by deep-rooted social inequalities. The West Bank’s
inequality in division into different
conflict The concept of systemic violence can be seen in the ways zones under varying
that occupation, territorial restrictions, and unequal levels of Israeli control,
access to resources perpetuate harm on a structural level. and the ongoing
settlement expansions,
Butler's nonviolent framework would call for addressing reflect structural
these foundational inequalities, suggesting that true peace violence that
cannot be achieved without dismantling the systems that disproportionately
sustain inequality and violence. In this context, harms Palestinians.
nonviolence is not simply refraining from physical
aggression but challenging the structural conditions that
make certain lives appear more valuable than others.
Reimagining Another key aspect of Butler's theory is her critique of Eg Rwanda
self-defence self-defence and how states often justify their violent
and state actions through fabricated threats. Eg Bosnia-Serbia
justification
for violence Butler’s approach would challenge this narrative by State actors used the
questioning who is included in the "self" that needs concept of self-defence
defending and how the constructed "other" is often as a justification for
manipulated to maintain control. violence → portrayed
opposition as an
Her framework would encourage scrutinising how existential threat,
violence is named and justified, particularly in contexts justifying mass violence
where the state monopolises the use of force while as necessary for
framing its actions as necessary for protection. self-defence
Interconnec- Butler emphasises the interconnectedness of all human Eg Ukraine-Russia
tedness of lives and argues that violence harms not only individuals
life and but the social fabric that binds communities together. The war has not only
radical non- taken thousands of lives
violence Nonviolent resistance is not about passivity but about but also disrupted the
building new social and political structures that respect social fabric of
global interdependence Ukrainian and Russian
communities, displacing
Applying this concept to the conflict would mean millions and creating
advocating for a solution that moves beyond territorial long-lasting divisions.
, gains or military dominance, and instead focuses on
rebuilding relationships, mutual recognition, and
addressing the deep-seated issues of inequality and
power.
However, preconditions for applying Butler’s theory in
such contexts might include the need for a shared
commitment to mutual recognition and equality, which
may be difficult to achieve in deeply polarised or
dehumanising conflict environments.
Butler’s nonviolence framework urges us to see beyond individual acts of violence and understand
the broader social, systemic, and structural inequalities at play. While applying her theory offers a
path to transformative nonviolent action, each conflict has its own preconditions, such as the need
for mutual recognition, deconstruction of harmful state narratives, and acknowledgment of
deep-rooted inequalities, that either facilitate or block the possibility of such an approach.
Desmond Tutu: without forgiveness, there is no future
Tutu’s philosophy of forgiveness and reconciliation is rooted in the belief that healing after
atrocities requires both acknowledgment of the truth and the willingness to forgive. He believes that
justice is sought not through retribution, but rather restoration.
His approach emphasises the necessity of reconciliation, not only between individuals but within
entire societies, especially those marked by systemic violence, deep inequality, and long-standing
conflict.
Need for Tutu emphasises the necessity of truth-telling as a Eg Rwanda
truth and precondition for reconciliation. This involves a public
acknowledg- and transparent process in which the perpetrators of After the 1994
ement of past violence or injustice admit to their actions, while victims genocide, the Gacaca
atrocities recount their experiences of suffering. Without courts aimed to uncover
truth-telling, there can be no real healing, as the root the truth behind the
causes of conflict remain unaddressed. atrocities and facilitate
forgiveness between
Truth-telling helps to validate the experiences of Hutus and Tutsis. The
victims, offering them a sense of justice by process of truth-telling
acknowledging their pain and the harm done. For was key to confronting
perpetrators, it is a way to confront the moral weight of the horrors of the
their actions, potentially leading to remorse and the genocide.
desire for forgiveness.
However, refusal of
Without this acknowledgement, any attempt at some individuals to
reconciliation is superficial and risks being merely admit their guilt or the
performative, allowing deep-seated grievances to fester partial nature of some
beneath the surface. confessions has limited
the full potential for
Precondition: all perpetrators have to be willing to forgiveness and
confess their crimes honestly but the question remains reconciliation
whether one can forgive on behalf of the dead.
Risk and Forgiveness is inherently risky because it makes the Eg Israel-Palestine
responsibility injured party vulnerable to rejection or further harm.
, in offering There is no guarantee that the perpetrator will respond Palestinians, as the more
forgiveness with remorse or a request for forgiveness. On the marginalised group,
contrary, the perpetrator might deny their wrongdoing, may risk offering
deflect responsibility, or even express indifference to the forgiveness without a
victim’s suffering. reciprocal
acknowledgment from
Challenge in reconciliation process: places the the Israeli state of the
emotional burden on the victim to offer forgiveness, structural violence
often without any assurance of reciprocal inherent in the
acknowledgment or apology & there is a risk that occupation.
victims, in extending forgiveness, may feel that their
pain is being trivialised or that justice is being
compromised.
However, Tutu insists that offering forgiveness is a
courageous act that ultimately benefits the victim by
freeing them from the cycle of anger and resentment →
victim asserts their power over their own healing, rather
than remaining dependent on the perpetrator's actions or
attitudes.
Forgiveness Tutu’s philosophy posits that forgiveness and Eg Ukraine-Russia
as path to reconciliation must go beyond individual acts and lead
collective to collective healing, particularly in societies fractured In the Russia-Ukraine
healing by violence and oppression. conflict, the level of
national trauma on both
For societies emerging from periods of intense violence, sides has created deep
oppression, or division, reconciliation cannot be scars, with civilians
achieved through punitive justice alone. While legal facing mass
justice may address specific crimes, it often leaves the displacement,
deeper societal wounds unhealed. destruction of homes,
and loss of life. Tutu
Forgiveness allows for a broader form of healing by would advocate for a
breaking the cycle of revenge and retribution that often future reconciliation
perpetuates conflict. → invites both victims and process that addresses
perpetrators to move beyond their past roles and the grievances of
envision a future built on mutual respect and Ukrainians suffering
understanding under Russian
aggression, as well as
the potential remorse of
Russian individuals
involved in the war.
Desmond Tutu’s model of forgiveness and reconciliation offers valuable insights into resolving
long-standing conflicts, but its application depends on specific preconditions: acknowledgment of
past atrocities, willingness to engage in truth-telling, and a commitment to collective healing.
1. Two paradigmatic views on human nature and violence have been presented by resp.
Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau.
a. What is their respective view on human nature? (4 pts)
b. Which of these views comes closest to Stephen Pinkers position and what does Pinker
give as empirical evidence for that? (6 pts)
2. Two opposing views on the world of international relations have been presented by
Fukuyama and Huntington.
Explain both views and give two arguments in favor of the one view and two
arguments in favor of the other, based on developments in the contemporary world.
3. What is Marx’ view on conflicts? Illustrate this by imaging how a Marxist would look
at contemporary Islamic terrorism.
4. What are, according to Elshtain and Tutu, the key characteristics of the process as
organized by the Truth& Reconciliation Committee (TRC) and why was this process in
their view necessary and appropriate? (4 points)
,Which, if any, of the approaches presented today, can be applicable to the conflict? Are there perhaps
any preconditions that allow or block the application in this context - from what you know about the
conflict?
Judith Butler: the Force of Nonviolence
Butler challenges traditional definitions of violence, urging us to reconsider how violence operates
not just in physical terms but through social and systemic structures. She argues that violence is not
simply an interaction between two opposing individuals but often involves broader, more insidious
systems such as racism and state power.
Butler advocates for a form of nonviolence that moves beyond individual moral choices to
collective action aimed at dismantling structural inequalities.
Systemic Butler argues that violence can exist in hidden or Eg Israel-Palestine
violence and systemic forms, particularly relevant in conflicts marked
structural by deep-rooted social inequalities. The West Bank’s
inequality in division into different
conflict The concept of systemic violence can be seen in the ways zones under varying
that occupation, territorial restrictions, and unequal levels of Israeli control,
access to resources perpetuate harm on a structural level. and the ongoing
settlement expansions,
Butler's nonviolent framework would call for addressing reflect structural
these foundational inequalities, suggesting that true peace violence that
cannot be achieved without dismantling the systems that disproportionately
sustain inequality and violence. In this context, harms Palestinians.
nonviolence is not simply refraining from physical
aggression but challenging the structural conditions that
make certain lives appear more valuable than others.
Reimagining Another key aspect of Butler's theory is her critique of Eg Rwanda
self-defence self-defence and how states often justify their violent
and state actions through fabricated threats. Eg Bosnia-Serbia
justification
for violence Butler’s approach would challenge this narrative by State actors used the
questioning who is included in the "self" that needs concept of self-defence
defending and how the constructed "other" is often as a justification for
manipulated to maintain control. violence → portrayed
opposition as an
Her framework would encourage scrutinising how existential threat,
violence is named and justified, particularly in contexts justifying mass violence
where the state monopolises the use of force while as necessary for
framing its actions as necessary for protection. self-defence
Interconnec- Butler emphasises the interconnectedness of all human Eg Ukraine-Russia
tedness of lives and argues that violence harms not only individuals
life and but the social fabric that binds communities together. The war has not only
radical non- taken thousands of lives
violence Nonviolent resistance is not about passivity but about but also disrupted the
building new social and political structures that respect social fabric of
global interdependence Ukrainian and Russian
communities, displacing
Applying this concept to the conflict would mean millions and creating
advocating for a solution that moves beyond territorial long-lasting divisions.
, gains or military dominance, and instead focuses on
rebuilding relationships, mutual recognition, and
addressing the deep-seated issues of inequality and
power.
However, preconditions for applying Butler’s theory in
such contexts might include the need for a shared
commitment to mutual recognition and equality, which
may be difficult to achieve in deeply polarised or
dehumanising conflict environments.
Butler’s nonviolence framework urges us to see beyond individual acts of violence and understand
the broader social, systemic, and structural inequalities at play. While applying her theory offers a
path to transformative nonviolent action, each conflict has its own preconditions, such as the need
for mutual recognition, deconstruction of harmful state narratives, and acknowledgment of
deep-rooted inequalities, that either facilitate or block the possibility of such an approach.
Desmond Tutu: without forgiveness, there is no future
Tutu’s philosophy of forgiveness and reconciliation is rooted in the belief that healing after
atrocities requires both acknowledgment of the truth and the willingness to forgive. He believes that
justice is sought not through retribution, but rather restoration.
His approach emphasises the necessity of reconciliation, not only between individuals but within
entire societies, especially those marked by systemic violence, deep inequality, and long-standing
conflict.
Need for Tutu emphasises the necessity of truth-telling as a Eg Rwanda
truth and precondition for reconciliation. This involves a public
acknowledg- and transparent process in which the perpetrators of After the 1994
ement of past violence or injustice admit to their actions, while victims genocide, the Gacaca
atrocities recount their experiences of suffering. Without courts aimed to uncover
truth-telling, there can be no real healing, as the root the truth behind the
causes of conflict remain unaddressed. atrocities and facilitate
forgiveness between
Truth-telling helps to validate the experiences of Hutus and Tutsis. The
victims, offering them a sense of justice by process of truth-telling
acknowledging their pain and the harm done. For was key to confronting
perpetrators, it is a way to confront the moral weight of the horrors of the
their actions, potentially leading to remorse and the genocide.
desire for forgiveness.
However, refusal of
Without this acknowledgement, any attempt at some individuals to
reconciliation is superficial and risks being merely admit their guilt or the
performative, allowing deep-seated grievances to fester partial nature of some
beneath the surface. confessions has limited
the full potential for
Precondition: all perpetrators have to be willing to forgiveness and
confess their crimes honestly but the question remains reconciliation
whether one can forgive on behalf of the dead.
Risk and Forgiveness is inherently risky because it makes the Eg Israel-Palestine
responsibility injured party vulnerable to rejection or further harm.
, in offering There is no guarantee that the perpetrator will respond Palestinians, as the more
forgiveness with remorse or a request for forgiveness. On the marginalised group,
contrary, the perpetrator might deny their wrongdoing, may risk offering
deflect responsibility, or even express indifference to the forgiveness without a
victim’s suffering. reciprocal
acknowledgment from
Challenge in reconciliation process: places the the Israeli state of the
emotional burden on the victim to offer forgiveness, structural violence
often without any assurance of reciprocal inherent in the
acknowledgment or apology & there is a risk that occupation.
victims, in extending forgiveness, may feel that their
pain is being trivialised or that justice is being
compromised.
However, Tutu insists that offering forgiveness is a
courageous act that ultimately benefits the victim by
freeing them from the cycle of anger and resentment →
victim asserts their power over their own healing, rather
than remaining dependent on the perpetrator's actions or
attitudes.
Forgiveness Tutu’s philosophy posits that forgiveness and Eg Ukraine-Russia
as path to reconciliation must go beyond individual acts and lead
collective to collective healing, particularly in societies fractured In the Russia-Ukraine
healing by violence and oppression. conflict, the level of
national trauma on both
For societies emerging from periods of intense violence, sides has created deep
oppression, or division, reconciliation cannot be scars, with civilians
achieved through punitive justice alone. While legal facing mass
justice may address specific crimes, it often leaves the displacement,
deeper societal wounds unhealed. destruction of homes,
and loss of life. Tutu
Forgiveness allows for a broader form of healing by would advocate for a
breaking the cycle of revenge and retribution that often future reconciliation
perpetuates conflict. → invites both victims and process that addresses
perpetrators to move beyond their past roles and the grievances of
envision a future built on mutual respect and Ukrainians suffering
understanding under Russian
aggression, as well as
the potential remorse of
Russian individuals
involved in the war.
Desmond Tutu’s model of forgiveness and reconciliation offers valuable insights into resolving
long-standing conflicts, but its application depends on specific preconditions: acknowledgment of
past atrocities, willingness to engage in truth-telling, and a commitment to collective healing.
