Introduction
The following article will give a detailed description of the nature of normative theory as well as how it relates to ideas about the role of culture in international politics. This article suggests that the various sub-theories in normative theory can help in understanding the role of culture in international politics. This theory will then show that the different perspectives in relation to ethics and morality in various cultures, have a bearing on politics of the world. In order to understand his better, the article will begin by giving a comprehensive description of the normative theory. This description will show that there are various sub-theories which determine the decision of an individual or an institution to act in an ethical manner. Furthermore, the research will examine the various notions in relation to this theory in order to gain a clear understanding of the role of cultural perspectives in international politics. Lastly, the article will show that the manner in which normative theory relates to the ideas about the role of culture in international politics can be equated into three final insights.
Normative Theory
Normative theory is a theory which studies the ethical actions of human beings, institutions or organisations. This theory is an investigation into the set of questions that arise when deciding on the manner in which an individual is expected to act in relation to morality. Over the years, there has been disagreement on what gives a disposition, a rule or an action its ethical force. In a broad sense, there are three competing theories in the normative theory that discuss how moral questions need to be answered, together with hybrid positions in which these elements have been combined. These elements encompass the virtue ethics theory, deontological ethical theory and consequentialism theory. An analysis of these theories can help one to gain a proper understanding of the normative theory (Brown, 2003, p. 15).
The Virtue Ethical theory in the normative theory was advanced by Plato and Aristotle. These theories’ main focus was the intrinsic character of an individual rather than their explicit actions. It examines the role of an individual as well as the virtues that one’s character embodies to evaluate and determine ethical behavior. Virtue ethics tend to emphasize on “being” rather than “doing”. In other words, in virtue ethics, ethics tend to come fromthe character and identity of an individual, instead of being a reflection of their actions and the consequences of the actions of the individual. Today,debate has been raging among the proponents of this theory in relation to the explicit virtues that are morally commendable. However, it is important to note that theorists are in agreementthat morality is based on intrinsic virtues. These values are the common elements that bring together the various normative philosophies into one field that is referred to as virtue ethics. At the same time, Aristotle and Plato’s concepts about virtues are different. Aristotle, on the one hand, believed that virtues function to a large extent as a way of safeguarding and ensuring healthy human relations, and in particular authentic relationships, without which the quest for happiness for an individual would be meaningless. (Cochran, 2009 p. 21). (Insert Plato’s theory and explain how they are slightly different) Plato, on the other hand, etc……
The next principle stemming from the normative theory is the Deontological theory of ethics. This theory tends to judge the ethical position of an individual on the basis of their adherence to a set of rules. This theory is sometimes referred to as a rule, obligation or duty on the basis of ethics. This is because one is bound by rules to perform his duties. Some of the philosophies in this theory include Kantianism, Moral Absolutism, Divine command theory and contemporary Deontology. The Kantianism theory, on the one hand, was advanced by Immanuel Kant who stipulated that in order for individuals to act in a moral manner, they must follow their duty. On the other hand, proponents of moral absolutism are of the opinion that some actions are either right or wrong, irrespective of the intentions that one has or of the consequences. Moreover, the divine command theory that an action can only be declared as the right of God has ruled that it is right. Lastly, contemporary Deontology relates to the principle of permissible harm. This theory holds that one may harm the other so as to save oneself, whilst inflicting the least harm as possible. This is acceptable if the harm is in the name of a greater good (Frost, 2006, p.33).
The last normative theory is Consequentialism. This theory sates that the consequences of the conduct of an individual should be taken as the basis for judging on his rightness and wrongness in relation to his conduct. This theory hence holds that an action that is morally right is one that leads to a good consequence or outcome. There are various philosophies based upon this theory. One of the most notable philosophies is Utilitarianism. This philosophy states that the actions of individuals are driven by fears and interest. However, interest tends to take precedence over fears. In addition, their interests are carried out according to the manner in which people view the consequences of this action. The second philosophy is State Consequentialism. This philosophy is of the opinion that an action is right if it leads to the welfare of the state through population growth, material wealth and order. Another element is Egoism. This theory holds that a moral individual is one who is self interested. This means that an action is right if the good to an individual has been maximized. Intellectualism philosophy, on the other hand, is of the opinion that the best action is one that leads to the promotion and fostering of knowledge, whilst Welfarism holds that the best action is one that leads to an increase of economic wellbeing. Lastly, Preference Utilitarianism is of the opinion that the best action can be described as the one that leads to the highest general preference satisfaction (Bernstein, 2008, p. 39).
Apart from these three major strands of the normative theory, there are also other minor theories that can help to understand this theory further. One of these theories is Ethics of Care. This theory, founded by Carol Gilligan, a feminist theorist, argues that morality tends to arise out of compassion and empathy. This theory is opposed to universal application of standards since it believes it is morally problematic, as it leads to the breeding of indifference or moral blindness (Lister, 2010, p. 36).
The next strand is Pragmatic Ethics. Contrary to the last former theory, this theory emphasises that the evolution of moral correctness is similar to the evolving nature of scientific knowledge. This means that ethics are constantly changing over time. For this reason, it is important to prioritize social reform over concerns of consequences, duty or individual virtue. One of the most notable proponents of this theory, John Dewey, examines that similar to the way science can be advanced in the future through the use of hypothesis, morality can also be advanced based on the various changes that will be in existence (Turner, 2010, p. 43).
The last strand under the normative theory is the Role Ethics. This theory is mainly based on roles in the family. This theory does not advocate for individualism. On the contrary, it states that morality is obtained through the relationships of an individual and their connection to community. One of the notable philosophies of this theory is Confucianism. This philosophy is centered on ensuring that one respects all family members. Under this concept, the basis of morality is on the fulfillment of a role, such as being a good parent to the children. These roles tend to be amplified through strong links witha community (Garnett, 2013, p. 27).
It is therefore clear that Normative Theory is a vast theory whichstudies the various facets of ethical actions.
How the Normative theory relates to ideas about the role of culture in international politics
The Normative theory relates to the ideas about the role of culture in international politics. In order to understand how this relationship exists, it is important to first analyse the nature ofinternational politics. By definition, international politics involves an examination of how different countries relate to each other. It involves an examination of the relationship between countries, the role that sovereign states, multinational organizations, international non-governmental organizations and inter-governmental organizations play on the international front (Murray, 2007, p. 51).
One of the most important features in international politics is understanding its ethical dimension. There are various judgments made in relation to moral standing as well as the moral standing of the players in international politics. The various judgments tend to vary between one country to another, and from one circumstance to the next. However, irrespective of the differences, it is important to note that every argument is based on what the players believe is ethical (Beitz, 2011, p.83).
The Normative theory addresses the ethical questions in international relations. At the same time, it also incorporates various approaches and theories, drawing on international relation theories, moral philosophy and political theory. It is important to note that the Normative theory is a very broad theory which includes a collection of theories in relations to ethics. Each of the theories that are present help to explain all the ethical questions that emerge in international politics (Beitz, 2011, P.45).
Looking at culture in international politics, the Normative theory shows that different cultures have different understandings of what acting ethically entails. More often than not, these countries hold their ethics in high regard and expect that individuals visiting the culture should exhibit the same ethical traits. Failure to do so means the individual, group of individuals, institutions and/or organizations will not fit into the culture of the country. Such an occurrence makes has detrimental effects for organisations as they cannot assimilate to the culture entirely, and over time, they may be forced to move away due to failure to mingle with the local society effectively (Laos, 2011, p.48).
The manner in which the Normative theory relates to the ideas of culture in international politics can be illustrated by two occurrences. During 1960s and the 1970s, international integration was at its peak. Countries were looking for ways in which they couldassimilate with each other for various purposes. One of the main reasons why this trend was on the rise was due to the increase in international trade. Countries were producing extra products, and hence favored international cooperation so as to sell their extra products to a greater number of countries. At the same time, they also necessitated products that were not being produced in their respective countries. For this reason, as countries integrated, the role of culture in relation to the normative theory of respecting what is ethical, became a staple of international politics (Lawson, 2015, p.29).
The second, less evident occurrence has been the development of a relationship between culture in international politics and international theory. It is a tradition that has been in existence for a large amount of time. This relationship can be traced back to some of the major theorists in the past such as Marx and Plato who, even then, saw the relevance of acting in a way which would maximize role satisfaction and work in the best interests of all involved. For this reason, these Normative theory philosphers still have an impact onthe international relations theoretical agendas which are present today (Devetak, Burke, & George, 2007).
The manner in which the Normative theory relates to culture in international politics can be divided into two elements. There are the cosmopolitanism and communitarianism forms of reasoning.
Firstly, cosmopolitanism is a form of reasoning which advocates for all cultures across the world to find the same moral standing. It also claims that people have duties that tend to extend to all individuals across the globe. This form of reasoning is usually in line with various political outfits. However, it tends to become less evident with relations between borders in countries, in the sense that they categorize some individuals as outsiders in a manner that makes them believe that they do not have the same moral measures (Murray,2007, p.19).
Looking at this philosophy, it is clear that different cultures from all across the world have the same general understanding of what they believe to be morally right. What one culture believes to be morally right will be similar or equal to the belief of the other. At the same time, this philosophy that an individual should not only engage in morally upright behavior when in his culture, but should also portray it to other people across the globe, plays an important role in international politics. An individual in one culture should hence be aware that they will not only be held accountable for their behavior while in another culture, but also when theymove to other cultures (Lund, Scheer, &Kozlenkova, 2013. P. 31).
The next philosophy under normative theory is communitarianism. The proponents of this philosophy tend to lay emphasis on the moral significance of specific cultures and loyalties. This philosophy hence holds that we are first a member of one culture, and thereafter a member of another culture. For example, an individual should first consider that the son of a certain individual, a Muslim or a Chinese before recognizing that he is a member of the global community (Beardsworth, 2011, p.33).(don’t really understand what you mean here. Explain the link between community and global community)
Under this philosophy, the role of culture is clearly evident. The culture that one belongs to has a great bearing on one’s behavior in international politics. For example, if an individual belongs to the Muslim culture, his ethical actions will be dictated by the ethical doctrine in the Muslim culture. When he interacts with other cultures, one should easily be able to tell that the individual is Muslim. This same case applies to the national culture. If an individual is Chinese, his culture and ethical bearing should on the international front should clearly show that he is Chinese. For example, in China, ethics dictate that when greeting someone, especially an individual with a higher rank or a greater age than you, one is expected to bow down. A Chinese should clearly portray this in the international front, and should not abandon it in place of the culture that he has encountered (Reus-Smit, 2012, p. 67).
The role of culture in international politics can also be understood through the subdivision of normative theory into two forms of reason. These are the consequentialist reasoning and the deontological reasoning.
Looking at consequentialist reasoning, it advocates for the need to make more decisions based on the outcomes of actions and choices. In various cultures, it is a common occurrence for individuals to make decisions based on the outcomes of our actions and choices. As such, culture is what is held dear by some countries, and hence dictates the manner in which they relate to others. A good example of this concept is the justification of torture on a suspect in order to gain some information that may end up saving many people. However, other cultures are greatly opposed to such activities, and the suspect may even sue if such actions were taken against him. For example, in the United States, a suspect may sue for such actions while in China, the law tends to justify such actions based on the fact that they will end up saving many more lives. Such beliefs in different cultures have led to conflicts between the different cultures, with one criticizing the other for engaging in activities that do not border in human rights (Bell, 2012, p. 44).
The next reasoning is deontological reasoning. According this this reasoning, the actions of individuals in a culture are based on adherence to the present rules and regulations. Different cultures have different rules in relation to ethics. In international politics, different nations have devised different rules in relation to ethics that they expect to be followed to the letter. One of the most notable ones is the death sentence. In some countries, the death sentence is included in the penal code for capital offenses. In other countries, the death sentence has been scrapped, and instead has been replaced by life imprisonment. In international politics, debate and conflicts have been raging on whether the death penalty should be upheld. There are those who believe that the death penalty goes against the sanctity of life while others feel that such individuals do not deserve to die. For this reason, many different cultures have had different conflicts in relation to this concept at an international level (Griffins, 2012, p. 59).
Key Insights
The manner in which normative theory relates to the ideas about the role of culture in international politics can be equated into three insights.
First, culture plays a very important role in international politics in ensuring that a norm has been ensured. The various world cultures show that ethics are very important in international politics. Each culture has its own codes that show what players should or should not do. Irrespective of the fact that some individuals are skeptical about the existence of international ethical standards, different cultures have different ethical guidelines that help in ensuring morality in international politics (Sutch,2011., p. 73).
At the same time, culture helps to show how everyone counts, as well as the point in which the different values affect morality. The ability of different cultures to show who has moral standings is very important in the responses of applied questions in the field of international politics, as well as the different ethical limitations across the different cultures (IKEDA, 2014, p. 153).
Therefore, culture tends to show that the globe is made up of moral agents who hence ensure moral responsibility in individuals. The presence of individuals who advocate for ethics in various cultures ensures that, on the international front, ethical decisions will always be portrayed (Marchetti, 2008, p. 47)
Bibliography
Beardsworth, R., 2011. Cosmopolitanism and international relations theory. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
Beitz, C. R., 2011. Political theory and international relations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Bell, D., 2012. Political Thought and International Relations. London. Routledge
Bernstein, R. J., 2008. The restructuring of social and political theory. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Brown, C., 2003. International relations theory: New normative approaches. New York: Columbia University Press.
Cochran, M., 2009. Normative theory in international relations: A pragmatic approach. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Devetak, R., Burke, A., & George, J., 2007. Introduction to international relations: Australian perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Frost, M., 2006. Towards a normative theory of international relations: A critical analysis of the philosophical and methodological assumptions in the discipline with proposals towards a substantive normative theory. Cambridge [Cambridgeshire: Cambridge University Press.
Garnett, J. C., 2013. Commonsense and the theory of international politics. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Griffins, M.,, 2012. International Relations: The Key Concepts. London. Routledge
IKEDA, J., 2014. The Idea of the “Road” in International Relations Theory. Perceptions: Journal Of International Affairs, 19(1), 153-160
Laos, N. K., 2011. Foundations of cultural diplomacy: Politics among cultures and the moral autonomy of man. New York: Algora Pub.
Lawson, S., 2015. Theories of International Relations: Contending Approaches to World Politics. Hoboken: Wiley.
Lister, R., 2010. Understanding theories and concepts in social policy. Briston: Policy Press.
Lund, D. J., Scheer, L. K., &Kozlenkova, I. V., 2013. Culture’s Impact on the Importance of Fairness in Interorganizational Relationships. Journal Of International Marketing, 21(4), 21-43.
Marchetti, R., 2008. Global Democracy: For and Against. London. Routledge
Murray, A. J. H., 2007. Reconstructing realism: Between power politics and cosmopolitan ethics. Edinburgh: Keele Univ. Press.
Reus-Smit, C., 2012. International Relations, Irrelevant? Don’t Blame Theory. Millennium, 03058298, 40(3, 525. doi:10.1177/0305829812442046
Sutch, P.,2011, Ethics, Justice and International Relations. London. Routledge
Turner, S. P., 2010. Explaining the normative. Cambridge, UK: Polity
