Full download test bank at ebookmeta.

com

International Relations Theory 7th Edition Mark V.

Kauppi

For dowload this book click LINK or Button below

https://ebookmeta.com/product/international-
relations-theory-7th-edition-mark-v-kauppi/

OR CLICK BUTTON

DOWLOAD EBOOK

Download More ebooks from https://ebookmeta.com

More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

International Relations Theory 7th Edition Kauppi

https://ebookmeta.com/product/international-relations-theory-7th-
edition-kauppi/

International Relations Theory 1st Edition Mykola

Kapitonenko

https://ebookmeta.com/product/international-relations-theory-1st-
edition-mykola-kapitonenko/

Employment Relations Theory & Practice 4th Ed. 4th

Edition Mark Bray

https://ebookmeta.com/product/employment-relations-theory-
practice-4th-ed-4th-edition-mark-bray/

The New Constructivism in International Relations

Theory 1st Edition David M. Mccourt

https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-new-constructivism-in-
international-relations-theory-1st-edition-david-m-mccourt/
Introduction to International Relations Theory and
Practice 3rd Edition Joyce P Kaufman

https://ebookmeta.com/product/introduction-to-international-
relations-theory-and-practice-3rd-edition-joyce-p-kaufman/

China s Rise and Rethinking International Relations

Theory 1st Edition Chengxin Pan (Editor)

https://ebookmeta.com/product/china-s-rise-and-rethinking-
international-relations-theory-1st-edition-chengxin-pan-editor/

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Peu. Ghosh

https://ebookmeta.com/product/international-relations-peu-ghosh/

Shakespeare s Theory of International Relations

Diplomacy Romance and Aesthetics 1st Edition William M.
Hawley

https://ebookmeta.com/product/shakespeare-s-theory-of-
international-relations-diplomacy-romance-and-aesthetics-1st-
edition-william-m-hawley/

Militarism and International Relations Political

Economy Security Theory 1st Edition Anna Stavrianakis
Jan Selby Editors

https://ebookmeta.com/product/militarism-and-international-
relations-political-economy-security-theory-1st-edition-anna-
stavrianakis-jan-selby-editors/
 Praise for International
Relations Theory

“I was taught with an earlier version of this text, and I teach with
the newest one today. It is simply the best introduction to IR theory,
a one-stop shop that provides a strong foundation for more
advanced study of the field. I cannot recommend it highly enough.”

—Christopher J. Fettweis, Tulane University

“This is an excellent text for courses in international relations theory.

With a great combination of historical context and modern
approaches, no other text provides such an in-depth look at
international relations theory that is so well written and easily
accessible for undergraduate students.”

—Andrew Miller, Wilkes University

“This book is vital to understanding the importance of international

relations theories to our current times. Instead of focusing on just
the main international relations theories, the authors link philosophy
with modern approaches to understanding current events and
interstate relationships. It is a must-read for people interested in
studying international relations.”

—Michael O. Slobodchikoff, Troy University

“The seventh edition of International Relations Theory offers an
updated version of the comprehensive coverage of the wide arrays
of perspectives within the field of international relations. From the
intellectual origins of international relations theory to the contending
voices within the discipline, this is a coherent, comprehensive, and
well-organized book for students interested in the field.”

—Bibek Chand, University of North Georgia

“The study of international relations has become increasingly

complex as new approaches take their place in the field alongside
traditional and historical perspectives. IR no longer is only about
realism, liberalism, and constructivism. Now feminist and normative
understandings and green theory have carved out niches in IR. For
students, and even scholars, it can be difficult to stay abreast of the
developments and debates ongoing within the field. Mark Kauppi
and Paul Viotti offer an indispensable—and comprehensive—guide to
the new and old intellectual trends that are shaping the study of
international relations.”

—Christopher Layne, Texas A&M University

This is the most accessible and comprehensive textbook on IR

theory I have ever come across. My students love how the theories
are presented as living and evolving fields of inquiry rather than
unchanging idols placed on pedestals. The authors’ approach
provides a solid foundation for student investigations into current
events and incorporates fantastically into experiential learning
opportunities.”

—Patricia C. Rodda, Carroll University

“Kauppi and Viotti’s seventh edition of International Relations Theory

has succeeded in providing a comprehensive overview of the
historical development and contemporary diversity of IR
perspectives, including the axes between both empirical versus
normative and traditional versus alternative approaches.”
—Tami Amanda Jacoby, University of Manitoba, Canada
Praise for International
Relations Theory
INTERNATIONAL
RELATIONS
THEORY
SEVENTH EDITION

MARK V. KAUPPI
GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY

PAUL R. VIOTTI
UNIVERSITY OF DENVER
 ROWMAN & LITTLEFIELD
Lanham • Boulder • New York • London
Executive Acquisitions Editor: Michael Kerns
Assistant Editor: Elizabeth Von Buhr
Sales and Marketing Inquiries: [email protected]
Credits and acknowledgments for material borrowed from other sources, and
reproduced with permission, appear on the appropriate pages within the text.
Published by Rowman & Littlefield
An imprint of The Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group, Inc.
4501 Forbes Boulevard, Suite 200, Lanham, Maryland 20706
www.rowman.com
86-90 Paul Street, London EC2A 4NE
Copyright © 2024 by The Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group, Inc.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any
electronic or mechanical means, including information storage and retrieval
systems, without written permission from the publisher, except by a reviewer who
may quote passages in a review.
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Information Available
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Kauppi, Mark V., author. | Viotti, Paul R., author.
Title: International relations theory / Mark V. Kauppi, Paul R. Viotti.
Description: Seventh edition. | Lanham, Maryland : Rowman & Littlefield, 2023. |
Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2023011655 (print) | LCCN 2023011656 (ebook) | ISBN
9781538171486 (cloth) | ISBN 9781538171493 (paperback) | ISBN
9781538171509 (epub)
Subjects: LCSH: International relations.
Classification: LCC JZ1305 .V56 2023 (print) | LCC JZ1305 (ebook) | DDC 327.101
—dc23/eng/20230310
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2023011655
LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2023011656
The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of
American National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for
Printed Library Materials, ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992.
 Brief Contents

Preface
1 Thinking about IR Theory

PART I: THE INTELLECTUAL ROOTS OF

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS THEORY
2 The Ancients: Greek, Chinese, and Indian
Thought
3 Greco-Roman Thought and the Middle Ages
4 The Rise of the State and Modern Political
Thought

PART II: IMAGES OF INTERNATIONAL

RELATIONS THEORY
5 Realism: The State and Balance of Power
6 Liberalism: Interdependence and Global
Governance
7 Economic Structuralism: Global Capitalism and
Postcolonialism
8 The English School: International Society and
Grotian Rationalism

PART III: INTERPRETIVE UNDERSTANDINGS

AND NORMATIVE CONSIDERATIONS
9 Constructivist Understandings
10 Positivism, Critical Theory, and Postmodern
Understandings
11 Feminist Understandings in IR Theory
12 Green Theory and Environmental
Understandings
13 Normative IR Theory: Ethics and Morality

Glossary
Index
About the Authors
 Contents
★★★

Preface
1 Thinking about IR Theory
Epistemology, Methodology, and Ontology
What Is Theory?
Explanation and Prediction
Abstraction and Application
Levels of Analysis
The Intellectual Roots of IR Theory
Images
Interpretive Understandings

PART I: THE INTELLECTUAL ROOTS OF

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS THEORY
2 The Ancients: Greek, Chinese, and Indian
Thought
Homer, Herodotus, Sun Tzu, and Kautilya
The Historical Context of Writings by Homer
and Herodotus
 Homer’s Epic Poems
Herodotus—The “Father of History”
Sun Tzu
Kautilya
Overview of Early Greek, Chinese, and Indian
Thinkers
Thucydides and the Peloponnesian War
Historical Context
History of the Peloponnesian War: The Work
Itself
Analytical Insights from Thucydides
Cautionary Tales: Lessons Drawn by
Thucydides from the Peloponnesian War
Thucydides and IR Theory
Reflections on Thucydides
After Thucydides: Plato, Aristotle, and Polybius
Historical Context
Plato
Aristotle
Polybius
Reflections on the Thought of Plato, Aristotle,
and Polybius
References
Classic Works (various editions)
Commentaries
3 Greco-Roman Thought and the Middle
Ages
 The Roman Empire and the Development of
Greco-Roman Thought
Historical Context
The Greek Stoics
The Roman Stoics
Cicero
Seneca and Marcus Aurelius
Titus Livy
Plutarch
Reflections on Thought in the Roman Empire
The Middle Ages
Historical Context
Medieval Writers
Augustine and Aquinas
Dante
Reflections on Thought in the Middle Ages
References
Classic Works (various editions)
Anthologies
Commentaries
4 The Rise of the State and Modern Political
Thought
The Renaissance, Reformation, and the Rise of
the State
Historical Context
Machiavelli
Republics and Security
 Thomas More
Botero and “Reason of State”
Hobbes
Sovereignty
Bodin
External Sovereignty
Grotius
Reflections on the Thought of Writers Related
to the Rise of States
Eighteenth- and Nineteenth-Century Thinking on
International Relations
Historical Context
The Enlightenment
Montesquieu
Rousseau
Kant
The Federalist Papers
Hegel
Clausewitz
International Political Economy
Adam Smith
Marx
Cobden and Liberalism
Hobson
Lenin
Reflections on Modern Thought Related to
States and Capitalism
 References
Classic Works (various editions)
Anthologies
Commentaries

PART II: IMAGES OF INTERNATIONAL

RELATIONS THEORY
5 Realism: The State and Balance of Power
Major Actors and Assumptions
Intellectual Precursors and Influences
Geopolitical Writers
Mid-Twentieth-Century Writers
Power
Definitions
Measurement
System
Game Theory and Anarchy
Distribution of Capabilities and the Balance of
Power
Realists and the Russian Invasion of Ukraine
Change
Power Transition
Globalization and Interdependence
Realists and International Cooperation
Realists and Their Critics
Realism: The Term Itself
The System and Determinism
 Realists and the State
Realists and the Balance of Power
Realism and Change
Realism: The Entire Enterprise
References
6 Liberalism: Interdependence and Global
Governance
Major Actors and Assumptions
Intellectual Precursors and Influences
Interest Group Liberalism
International Organization
Integration
Transnationalism
Interdependence
International Regimes
Neoliberal Institutionalism
Global Governance
Economic Interdependence and Peace
The Democratic Peace
Decision-Making
Change and Globalization
A Liberal-Institutionalist Worldview
Liberalism and the Russian Invasion of Ukraine
Liberals and Their Critics
Anarchy
Theory-Building
The Democratic Peace
 Voluntarism
References
7 Economic Structuralism: Global Capitalism
and Postcolonialism
Major Actors and Assumptions
Intellectual Precursors and Influences
Dependency Theorists
ECLA and UNCTAD Arguments
Radical Critiques
Domestic Forces
The Capitalist World-System
System
Political, Economic, and Social Factors
Gramsci and Hegemony
Change and Globalization
Postcolonialism
Economic Structuralists and Their Critics
The Question of Causality
Reliance on Economics
System Dominance
Theoretical Rigidity
Accounting for Anomalies
Defining Alternatives and Science as Ideology
Responses
References
8 The English School: International Society
and Grotian Rationalism
Major Actors and Assumptions
Intellectual Precursors and Influences
The Divergence of British and American
Scholarship
Genesis of the English School
Levels of Analysis and Theory
Change
From System to International Society
From International Society to World Society
The English School, Liberals, and Social
Constructivists
The English School and Its Critics
Methodological Muddle
Historical Knowledge
Political Economy, the Environment, and
Gender
Conceptual and Philosophical Eclecticism
References

PART III: INTERPRETIVE UNDERSTANDINGS

AND NORMATIVE CONSIDERATIONS
9 Constructivist Understandings
Major Actors and Assumptions
Intersubjectivity
Rules
 Norms
Agents
Identity
Logic of Appropriateness
Interests
The Diversity of Social Constructivist Thought
Schools of Thought
Levels of Analysis
Wendt’s “Naturalist” Constructivism
Constructivist Affinities in the Broader IR Field
Constructivists and Their Critics
Liberal and Realist Critiques
Debates within Constructivism and
Postmodern Challenges
References
10 Positivism, Critical Theory, and
Postmodern Understandings
Positivism
Mill’s Canons of Causality
Cause-Effect Relations
Intellectual Precursors: Phenomenology and
Hermeneutics
Critical Theory: Major Assumptions
Queer Theory—Thinking Critically about IR
Postmodernism: Major Assumptions
Critical Theorists, Postmodernists, and Their
Critics
 Summation
References
11 Feminist Understandings in IR Theory
Intellectual Precursors and Influences
Major Assumptions
Strands of Feminism in International Relations
Gender, War, and Security Studies
Gender, the State, and Civil Society
Gender and International Organizations
Gendered Understandings and IR Theory
Feminists and Their Critics
What Critics?
Research Program and Cumulative Knowledge
References
12 Green Theory and Environmental
Understandings
Understanding Environmental Challenges
IR Theory Perspectives on the Environment
Green Theory
Green Theory and Their Critics
References
13 Normative IR Theory: Ethics and Morality
Norms, Ethics, and Morality
Normative Theory: Alternative Perspectives
The Levels of Analysis
Moral Relativism
 Secular Bases for Moral or Ethical Choice
Justice and War
Applying Just War Theory in the Twenty-First
Century
Morality and Weaponry
Justice and Human Rights
The Enlightenment
Current Application
Humanitarian Treatment and the Sovereign
State
Armed Intervention and State Sovereignty
Intervention and Civil Wars
Criteria for Humanitarian Intervention
Alternative Images and Foreign Policy Choice
Rationality and Foreign Policy Choice
Values, Choices, and Theory
References

Glossary
Index
About the Authors
 Preface
★★★

The genesis of this book dates to the 1980s when the coauthors
were both living and working in Germany after graduate school.
While strolling through the grounds of Schloss Solitud (a summer
palace in Stuttgart), we discussed the diversity of thinking about
international relations which, for some, was a frustration, and for
others something to be celebrated. We aspired to bring some degree
of order to the field, focusing on various images or perspectives and
utilizing a common framework to make it easier for students to
compare and contrast these alternative lenses. We began with what
we termed realism, pluralism, and globalism that eventually evolved
into realism (with its variants), liberalism, economic structuralism,
and the English School. Normative theory remains central as does
our treatment of intellectual precursors upon whose shoulders the
corpus of IR theory rests.
Realism has traditionally dominated academic discourse, but by the
1980s the study of international organizations and transnational
actors, both governmental and nongovernmental, became more
prominent in the field—the basis for what has become known as the
liberal image of world politics. At the same time, economic
structuralist perspectives were developed by scholars interested in
explaining the persistence of global inequality and the ongoing
postcolonial domination of the capital-rich “north” over the
economically least developed countries of the “Global South.”
 As the years passed, change and continuity remained hallmarks of
both international politics and international relations theory that
seeks to explain how the world works. With origins in the 1950s, the
English School emerged as an effort to find a middle course in
international society—a via media—between realism and idealism on
the one hand and realism and a liberal, rule-based order on the
other. Constructivist understandings in IR theory also became
prominent as did the feminist, postmodern, critical, and green-theory
understandings—alternative interpretive lenses for viewing issues in
international relations and world politics. In every case, we strove to
be as fair and even-handed in how we approached each image or
perspective, albeit devoting what we considered an appropriate
amount of text based on our assessment of the relative importance
of each as reflected in the journals and books of the IR field.
When the Cold War ended in the early 1990s, there was hope in
some quarters that great power conflict could be minimized in a new
era of increasing globalization in a rule-based order. It was a time of
developing or expanding cooperative international regimes whether
dealing with global trade, investment for development, arms control,
human rights, or other issues. Integration in Europe reached a high
point in the establishment of a European Union (EU) by the new
millennium in a step-by-step process that began in the 1950s. Some
two decades plus into the twenty-first century, however, great power
competition is back as evidenced by concerns over the rise of China
and the ongoing implications of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in
February 2022. Nonstate actors, however, continue to play an
important international role. Global inequality is still with us. And
over the past thirty-plus years, other critical issues have been added
to the international agenda including the positive and negative
effects of technology, global pandemics, concerns about the harm
done to human beings in relation to gender, sexual orientation,
human trafficking, labor exploitation, and other human rights
challenges. Looming over everything is the issue of climate change.
What has not changed, however, is our rationale and objectives
for this book. As noted in the preface to the first and subsequent
editions, our goals are to discuss underlying assumptions, images,
and interpretive ­understandings that influence scholarly work,
reference representative samples of these works, ­discuss key
concepts, and encourage the reader to scrutinize critically the ­‐
analyses dealing with international or world politics.
What has also not changed is our mutual appreciation for political
philosophy and history. We have found that over the years a deeper
grounding in intellectual precursors of politics in general and
international relations theory, in particular, has enriched our
understanding of their contributions to more recent work. Indeed,
most authors would probably agree with Sir Isaac Newton’s
sentiment from 1675 that “if I have seen further, it is by standing on
the shoulders of giants.” This emphasis on intellectual precursors, we
would argue, sets our work apart from all other IR theory textbooks.
Furthermore, in this edition instead of referencing green or
environmental thought in the images section of the book, we have
made it a stand-alone chapter as a lens or interpretive
understanding. This includes noting how realists and liberals tend to
view the challenges posed by climate change. And while wishing to
avoid dating ourselves by referencing a myriad of current (and hence
soon-to-be out-of-date) international events, we felt it necessary to
address how realist and liberal (or English School) theoretical
perspectives have explained the cause, impact, and global reaction
to the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
In sum, to understand the complexity of international relations or
world politics, we need more than ever to comprehend the various
images, interpretive and normative understandings, and intellectual
roots of IR theory. We believe the person who has mastered this
material will be well-equipped to engage intellectually—and perhaps
professionally—with the world of international politics.
One stylistic and substantive note: A few current adopters of the
previous edition suggested that we highlight key concepts in the
text. These concepts also appear in the glossary. We have done so in
the case of the introductory chapter and those dealing with more
recent works on international relations theory that tend to be
concept-heavy. We hope this enhances the learning experience as
several concepts in the chapters are more fully explained in the
glossary.
 1
Thinking about IR Theory
★★★

International Relations Theory is designed for a wide range of

readers. Our primary purpose is to bring together in one volume an
overview of ancient, modern, and contemporary political thought on
this topic. In part I, we identify what is sorely lacking in most books
on IR theory: the intellectual and historical roots of the major ideas
that underlie much of the present-day literature on international
relations. In parts II and III, we discuss current approaches to
international relations (IR) theory. In this introductory chapter, we
set the stage by covering the following topics:

How do we comprehend the world? What is epistemology,

methodology, and ontology?
What is theory?
Make the case why a discussion of the intellectual roots of IR
theory in part I is important to understanding twentieth- and
twenty-first-century works.
Summarize upcoming chapters in parts II and III on images,
interpretive understandings, and normative considerations.

EPISTEMOLOGY, METHODOLOGY, AND

ONTOLOGY
If a student of international relations wishes to analyze critically and
understand contemporary approaches to IR theory, we believe one
should first have a basic grasp of the roles of epistemology,
methodology, and ontology in theory building. Theorists do not
always make these roles explicit, yet they undergird and permeate
the theory-building endeavor, often serving as unstated assumptions.
Epistemology involves the ways and means by which we come to
know (or at least what we think we know) something about the
world. For example, a popular epistemology is empiricism—the view
that the only grounds for making truth claims is through direct
observation of the world using our senses. Alternative
epistemologies to empiricism exist as reflected in constructivist,
critical theory, postmodernist, and feminist approaches to IR theory
(all of which are discussed in subsequent chapters).
Positivism dominates IR theorizing and is reflected in the chapters
on images (see the more extensive discussion in chapter 10).
Depending on the scholar, it has been categorized variously as an
epistemology, methodology, or combination of the two. Positivism
consists of four underlying implicit assumptions or beliefs:

1. The unity of the natural and social sciences—we

can study society as we study the natural world;
2. We can draw a distinction between facts and
values;
3. Regularities exist in the social as well as the
natural world and they can be identified; and
4. Empirical validation or falsification is the hallmark
of “real” inquiry.
Positivism specifically endorses the use of formal hypothesis testing
or causal modeling as methodologies—modes of research and
analysis or a set of rules for the actual practice of investigating
international relations. This may involve quantitative (use of statistics
and mathematical equations) or nonquantitative—so-called
qualitative—methods (such as employing in-depth case and
comparative case studies) to test empirically the hypotheses we
generate. Very often when one hears the term “scientific method,”
the reference is to positivism with the focus on what is observable,
empirical, and measurable. This is a convention we adopt in this
book.
Ontology refers to how each of us views the world—how we see
or understand the essence of things around us. Are there, for
example, actual structures out there that influence the behavior of
actors? For example, the concept of an “international system” is
prevalent in the literature. Is it an actual material, physical, tangible
structure consisting of capabilities such as weapons, troops, and
economic resources? Or can we also conceive of structure as
consisting of internationally shared ideas, beliefs, and norms? Is
what we observe caused, facilitated, or impeded by these material or
ideational structures (e.g., distribution of power or cultures) external
to the actors or within which they are immersed? On the other hand,
are terms like system or structure merely abstract constructs that
facilitate our understanding of the world around us?
What is my or your ontology or worldview? Do states or nonstate
actors matter or, if both do, which matters more? How do we view
these actors? If they are states, do we see them acting as if they are
rational individuals? Do we assume these actors are more important
in explaining international relations than the material or ideational
structures? Do we see events or outcomes as effects having
discoverable causes? Or are we prone, by contrast, to see events as
largely random occurrences? Do we see (or come to see) human
beings important as individuals, or do we instead look to larger
groups or aggregations of people to find social meaning? Does the
individual have a distinct identity, or is the concept of “self” a
function of relationships with others and the environment within
which one is immersed? Do human beings have the capacity to think
and act freely, or are their actions and even their thoughts externally
influenced or even determined? Do we see things in good and evil
terms and thus have the propensity to draw moral distinctions? Or
do we see what we observe, if not from a morally neutral position,
then a more or less morally indifferent position?
The answers to such questions have profound consequences on
one’s scholarship and even the way we lead our lives. To clarify this
admittedly difficult concept, let’s turn to IR theory for examples. One
of the more theoretically self-conscious IR theorists, Ernst B. Haas
(1924–2003), describes how his work was influenced by an
ontological orientation that “avoided fixed dogmas and unchanging
universal values” and “highlighted human agency over other causal
forces.”
Another theorist, James N. Rosenau (1924–2011), sees some of
us as ontologically more prone to engage in theorizing than others.
Rosenau states that one’s being “able to assume that human affairs
are founded on an underlying order”—an ontological predisposition—
is essential to thinking theoretically.1 Beyond this ontological
assumption, Rosenau adds eight more “preconditions for creative
theorizing”—his answer to a student’s question. As he puts it, “to
think theoretically, one”:

a. has to avoid treating the task as that of

formulating an appropriate definition of theory;
b. has to be clear as to whether one aspires to
empirical theory or value theory;
c. must be predisposed to ask about every event,
every situation, or every observed phenomenon,
“Of what is it an instance?”;
d. must be ready to appreciate and accept the need
to sacrifice detailed description for broad
observations;
e. must be tolerant of ambiguity, concerned about
probabilities, and distrustful of absolutes;
 f. must be playful about international phenomena .
. . [having] a creative imagination . . . the habit
of . . . specifying unlikely conditions and
analyzing them as if they prevailed;
g. must be genuinely puzzled by international
phenomena; [and]
h. must be constantly ready to be proven wrong.
For their part, the ontologies Kenneth N. Waltz (1924–2013) and
many other realists (chapter 5) bring to the IR field provide a darker
view of the reality they are prone to see, a dimmer view of human
beings and their potential than liberals typically hold. It is a tradition
steeped in the thought of Thucydides, Niccolò Machiavelli, Thomas
Hobbes, and even James Madison and Alexander Hamilton—the
latter two agreeing in the Federalist Papers on the term depravity to
describe the human condition or the natural state in which human
beings find themselves. Given such underlying ontologies, the realist
image not surprisingly is of a world of competition among self-
oriented states as principal actors with different interests and
capabilities or power they bring to bear in the pursuit of these
interests.
Waltz describes liberals (chapter 6), by contrast, as (mis)informed
by taking the ontological position that harmony is the natural
condition for human beings and dismissing dissension and strife as
supposedly arising from “mistaken belief, inadequate knowledge,
and defective governance.”2 Economic structuralists (chapter 7)
share with realists a dim view of present reality, but one in which
exploitation and victimization are the operative words to describe the
human condition. Dialectical materialism is an example of a
theoretical idea drawn from a Marxist, materialist ontology. Economic
structuralists vary in their assessments of the future course and
effects on the human condition of this historical mechanism. The
future may be different from the present and the past. This guarded
level of optimism is also evident in the English School (chapter 8) in
which scholars who combine influences of both realist (Hobbes) and
liberal (Grotius or Kant) to write of an international (or even world)
society still under construction.
The ontologies we bring to the IR field influence the imagery we
construct. Images are general perspectives on international relations
and world politics that consist of certain assumptions about key
actors and processes that influence our theorizing. There is a fine
line between how we understand the essence of things (e.g., the
condition or nature of human beings and the degree to which human
beings as agents matter) and the images we have of international or
world politics. To say ontologies and images are related, however, is
not to say they are the same things.

WHAT IS THEORY?
The word theory also means different things to different people. It
may even mean different things to the same person. In common
parlance, for example, something may be true “in theory” but not in
fact or in a particular case or set of circumstances. In this rather
loose usage, “in theory” equates to “in principle” or “in the abstract.”

Explanation and Prediction

Another meaning, more consistent with usage in this volume, is that
theory is simply a way of making the world or some part of it more
intelligible or better understood. Theories dealing with international
relations aspire to achieve this goal. Making things more intelligible
may, of course, amount to nothing more than better or more precise
descriptions of the things we observe. Although accurate description
is essential, theory is something more.
For many people with a scientific or positivist bent, theory
involves explanation. One goes beyond mere description of
phenomena observed and engages in causal explanation based on
certain prior occurrences or conditions. To assume this is possible is
an ontological assumption about reality or “the world out there.”
Explanation from the positivist perspective involves establishing the
phenomenon it explains as something that was to be expected in the
circumstances in which it occurred. This is what Carl G. Hempel
terms the “requirement of explanatory relevance.” Information is
explanatory only if it “affords good grounds for believing that the
phenomenon to be explained does, or did, indeed occur. This
condition must be met if we are to be entitled to say: ‘That explains
it—the phenomenon in question was indeed to be expected under
the circumstances.’” This information will include one or more laws,
as without a knowledge of regularities or patterns in international
relations, we could not expect certain happenings at particular
times.3
How do we identify these laws? The preferred positivist method is
through the development of hypotheses—a proposition relating two
or more variables. Thus, whenever A is present, then B can be
expected to follow. “If A, then B” as hypothesis may be subject to an
empirical test—that is, tested against real-world or factual data to
determine its lawlike quality. “If states engage in arms races, then
the likelihood of war increases” is an example of such a hypothesis.
Alternatively, hypotheses can be stated in a “most likely” and “least
likely” format. For example, “The stronger the leading sea power’s
relative capability position, the less likely it is that other great
powers will balance against it.”4 Indeed, formal statements and
testing of hypotheses through the use of a statistical methodology
are seen by many positivists as central to the theory-building
process. Resultant laws or lawlike statements, therefore, allow IR
theorists to make at least tentative predictions about possible
outcomes in international relations: “Given these circumstances as
validated by our tested hypotheses, we can expect X, Y, or Z.”
The primary research strategy that entails invoking laws in a
scientific explanation can be called a generalizing or covering-law
approach. Many realists and liberals are rooted in this tradition,
seeking covering laws of such phenomena as war, deterrence,
cooperation, and economic integration. The event to be explained is
an instance of a certain type of event that follows regularly from the
conditions specified.
Jack Snyder, for example, has addressed the important question
of why the Cold War ended peacefully. His explanation involved
establishing the laws and initial conditions that would lead one to
believe that, given these circumstances, the peaceful collapse of the
Soviet empire was to be expected. He posits that expansionist myths
coupled with, among other factors, the timing of industrialization
provide a framework for understanding the type of collapse
experienced by the Soviet Union.5 Such factors could be applied to
other cases.
Another example of positivist social science at work is the
ambitious effort of Kenneth Waltz to offer a more formal theory of
international politics to explain general tendencies and patterns of
behavior among states. To Waltz, “Theories explain laws.” Waltz
identifies a power-based structure of the international system that
purportedly explains the behavior of states as the system’s principal
actors. Having stated “the theory being tested,” one proceeds to

infer hypotheses from it; subject the hypotheses to

experimental or observational tests; . . . use the definitions
of terms found in the theory being tested; eliminate or
control perturbing variables not included in the theory under
test; devise a number of distinct and demanding tests; if a
test is not passed, ask whether the theory flunks completely,
needs repair and restatement, or requires a narrowing of the
scope of its explanatory claims.6

The commitment to positivism is clear in the last comment that

underscores the importance of falsifiability in the testing of theories.
While the covering-law strategy is the most popular for those
operating within the positivist framework, there is also a
reconstructive positivist strategy. In this case, no attempt is made to
place the phenomenon under investigation into a larger class.
Rather, the event is explained as the expected endpoint of a
concrete historical sequence, not as an instance of category A, B, or
C. Reconstructive explanations also rely on laws, but these are not
covering laws but rather component laws—each pertains only to a
part of the pathway that led to the event or phenomenon being
explained.
For example, like Snyder, William Wohlforth attempts to explain
the peaceful collapse of the Soviet empire. He does not, however,
attempt to “cover” Soviet behavior by showing how we would expect
it to be given the circumstances. Instead, he details the sequence of
events leading up to the collapse of the Soviet empire. The behavior
to be explained emerges from this analysis and historical
reconstruction.7
In terms of methodology and methods, therefore, some IR
scholars prefer a research strategy that relies on the formal
construction of hypotheses and theories. These may be tested, for
example, through the application of statistical methods. Others
prefer to rely on nonquantitative indicators or case and comparative
case studies, historical methods, and reasoned argument—the so-
called traditional or qualitative approaches to theory building.8
Whatever differences IR scholars might have among themselves,
those with a positivist or scientific commitment all tend to agree on
one thing: Theory is necessary and unavoidable when it comes to
explaining and attempting to foresee or predict future outcomes.
Because as human beings we are subjective creatures who see and
make sense of the world around us from different points of view,
even such scientifically oriented scholars approach their subject
matter with diverse perspectives, paradigms, research programs,9
theoretical constructs, or images. It is the theory and hypotheses or
propositions we are holding (or challenging) that tell us what to
focus on and what to ignore in making sense of the world around us.
Without theory, we would be overwhelmed and immobilized by an
avalanche of mere facts or occurrences around us. In short, the
sense we make of what we observe is informed by both the
perspectives and theories we hold.
 In this admittedly positivist understanding, a theory is an
intellectual construct composed of a set of interrelated propositions
that help one to identify or select facts and interpret them, thus
facilitating explanation and prediction concerning the regularities and
recurrences or repetitions of observed phenomena. One certainly
can think theoretically when it comes to explaining foreign policy
processes in general or the foreign policy of a particular state. IR
theorists, however, tend as well to be interested in patterns of
behavior among diverse states and nonstate actors operating
internationally or globally. In identifying patterns, the stage is set for
making modest predictions about the possible nature and direction
of change. To think theoretically, however, is not to engage in point
predictions—“A will attack B the first week of the year”—regardless
of how much foreign policy, national security, and intelligence
analysts may aspire to such precision.
To think theoretically, therefore, is to be interested in central
tendencies. The theorist views each event as an instance of a more
encompassing class or pattern of phenomena. Fitting pieces into a
larger whole makes theory-building analogous to puzzle-solving. In
fact, for many theorists, the goal is not merely explanation of
patterns of behavior, but explanations of patterns that at first glance
seem counterintuitive or different from what one might expect.
War poses a most important puzzle for IR theorists. Why does the
phenomenon persist even though wars are extremely costly in terms
of lives and treasure lost? Quincy Wright’s A Study of War and Lewis
Richardson’s Statistics of Deadly Quarrels were pioneering efforts at
trying to solve this puzzle through the use of statistical methods or
causal modeling. Bruce Bueno de Mesquita’s The War Trap and John
Vasquez’s The War Puzzle are also examples of work in this genre.
Examples of continuing efforts to build better theory by using
reasoned argument, historical and comparative cases, or other
nonquantitative, qualitative methods include Kenneth Waltz’s classic
Man, the State and War, Michael Howard’s The Causes of Wars,
Stephen Walt’s Revolution and War, Michael Doyle’s Ways of War
and Peace, and Stephen Van Evera’s Causes of War.
 Theory in a formal, positivist sense specifies relations among
variables and ideally would weigh them with the precision one finds
in an algebraic equation. Such fully developed theory is less common
in the social sciences and certainly not in international relations;
even positivists wedded to scientific modes of inquiry confess to be
operating at a lesser level of theoretical development than the
natural sciences.
General theories that strive to provide a complete account of the
causes of war or other phenomena are less common than partial, or
middle-range, theories that are more modest in the scope of what is
to be explained or predicted. Part of the war puzzle addressed by
such middle-range theorists, for example, involves crises and
decision-making in crises. Are partial theories like building blocks
that can eventually be assembled into a fully developed, general
theory of war? Some theorists would say yes and that the most
productive enterprise for the present is the development of better
middle-range theories. Not everyone would agree. Partial or middle-
range theories have tended to be essentially nonadditive: They are
merely islands of theory without bridges to connect them into a
coherent whole.10
Even if such connections might be made, the result would
probably undercut the social science goal of developing theories that
are parsimonious—explaining a great deal of behavior through the
use of relatively few concepts. Theories that lack parsimony by
definition contain too many factors or variables and quickly become
as complex as, or more complex than, the reality they purport to
explain. If practically everything is portrayed as a cause, then has
anything really been found to explain or predict what we observe?

Abstraction and Application

The world of theory is an abstract one. Theories may actually exist
apart from facts. Mathematical theorists, for example, deal entirely
in the realm of abstraction, whether or not their work has direct
relevance to problems of the world in which we live. Practical
application for the work of mathematical theorists is sometimes
found years later, if ever. From the positivist perspective, however,
empirically based theories in the social or natural sciences, by
contrast, relate to facts and provide explanation or prediction for
observed phenomena. Hypotheses associated with these theories
are subject to testing against real-world data. The theorist need not
have any purpose in developing such empirical theories other than
satisfying his or her intellectual curiosity, although many will seek to
make their work “policy relevant.”
Policy-relevant theories may have explicit purposes that stem from
the value preferences of the theorist, such as reducing the likelihood
of war or curbing arms races. Acting on such theories, of course, is
the domain of the policy maker, a task separate from that of the
empirical theorist. Theorists who become policy makers may well
make choices informed by what theories say will be the likely
outcomes of implementing one or another alternative. Their choices
may be informed by empirical theory or understandings of world
events, but the decisions they make are still heavily based on value
preferences.
As noted at the outset of this section, a common dismissive
attitude toward theory is that while something may be true “in
theory,” it does not apply to the real world. For reasons discussed
earlier, this is a very shortsighted view. Theory is actually a way to
become engaged in an increasingly globalized world that goes
beyond today’s headlines. Theory can help us cut through the
blizzard of information we are all faced with daily. Reflecting on his
life’s work theorizing in the IR field, Waltz speaks for many theorists
with a positivist orientation to international relations, confidently
telling us that “from theory all else follows.” He adds that “theory
explains and may at times anticipate or predict outcomes.” In this
regard, “a political theory, if it is any good, not only explains
international outcomes, but also provides clues to situations and
actions that may produce more of the desired and fewer of the
undesired ones.”11 Put another way, there is nothing so practical as
a good theory.
Levels of Analysis
Let us assume one is interested in theorizing about the causes of
war. Where should one focus one’s initial efforts? Does one deal with
individual decision makers or small groups of individuals engaged in
the policy process? How important, for example, are such factors as
the correctness of individual perceptions or bargaining skills in
determining the decision to go to war? On the other hand, if one
looks outside the individual or small decision-making group to the
entire state apparatus, society as a whole, or the international
political system of states, one is acknowledging the importance of
external or environmental factors as well.
The levels of analysis constitute a framework designed to organize
and assist in systematic thinking about international relations. We
differentiate the term levels of analysis (individual or group, state
and society, and “system” as a whole) from units of analysis, the
latter referring to states, organizations, individuals or groups,
classes, and other entities. What one is trying to explain or study
(such as the outbreak of war) is known as the dependent variable.
Factors at different levels of analysis we suspect as being causally
related to what we are trying to explain typically are termed
independent variables. Thus, we can look both “inside” the state as
a principal unit of analysis in a search for explanatory factors at
individual or group and societal levels and “outside” the state to take
account of factors that causally affect its actions and interactions
with other states at an international “system” level.
Work by Waltz in the 1950s on the causes of war represented a
path-breaking effort due to his identification of distinct levels of
analysis and his attempt to specify the relations among these levels.
Was the cause of war (the dependent variable) to be found in the
nature of individuals? (Are humans innately aggressive?) Or in the
nature of states and societies? (Are some types of states more
aggressive than others?) Or in the nature of the international system
of states? (Is anarchy a “permissive” cause of war, there being no
obstacle to the use of force by sovereign states in a world without
central governance?)
 Each answer reflects a different level of analysis—individual (or
group of individuals), state and society, or international (see figure
1.1). In 1961, the importance of the question of levels of analysis to
the study of international relations was further discussed in detail in
a then often-cited article by J. David Singer. Singer argues that one’s
choice of a particular level of analysis determines what one will and
will not see. Different levels tend to emphasize different actors,
structures, and processes.12
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
kurjuutta, sillä silloin ne minun silmissäni ovat tuhatta vertaa
kauniimpia luonnon rumana niitä ympäröidessä. —

Nyt oli taas niiden syysretken aika. Yhä alemmaksi ne laskeutuivat

illan hämärää, tuhkanväristä vettä kohden. Ne pieksivät ilmaa
suurilla siivillään, kohosivat suoraan ylös lentoaan pysäyttääkseen ja
laskeutuivat sitte veteen, joka tervehdykseksi syleillen huuhteli niiden
pehmeäkaarteisia ruumiita.

Ja seisoissani lepikkoon piiloutuneena ulapan rannalla, juohtui

minun mieleeni, miten pikkupoikana näin ensikerran nuo ihanat
linnut. Silloinkin oli syysilta, ja minä leikin kotorannan kuihtuneiden
koivujen alla, ja poimin lakkini täyteen keltasia alaspudonneita lehtiä.
Ne olivat kultarahoja, joilla minun piti ostaa kaiken maailman
ihanuudet — talo ja valkosia hevosia ja vaunut naapuritöllin
tummakutriselle tytölle. Silloin näin äkkiä suurten valkosten lintujen
tulevan ulapan yli ja laskeutuvan vedenpinnalle lähelle rantaa, missä
istuin. Ne tulivat niin hiljaa, ääntämättä ja laulamatta ja minä kuulin
vain heikon kohauksen kuin laine olisi rantaan loiskahtanut, niiden
laskeutuessa veteen. Minä ihan jäykistyin riemusta, ja sydämeni
seisahtui hetkeksi ja alkoi sitte sykkiä niin kiivaasti, että luulin rintani
särkyvän. Siinähän olivat ihan likelläni, ilmielävinä satujen linnut,
joita koko lapsen hehkuvan sydämen kaipuulla aina olin toivonut
näkeväni. En tiennyt, mistä ne tulivat, en tiennyt, minne niiden tie vei,
— lapsuuden unelmain ihmeellinen loisto niiden valkeasta puvusta
säteili. Minun sielussani oli vain hämärä aavistus oudosta maasta
tuhanten korkeiden vaarain ja vesien takana, vihannoivasta maasta,
missä onnelliset ihmiset kulkivat välkkyväin virtain rantoja ja
katselivat riemuiten niitä ihania lintuja.
 Minä kyyristyin ja ryömin rantaäyräälle, päästäkseni kuivuneiden
keisojen suojassa niitä niin liki kuin suinkin. — Miten aavemaisen
valkeita nuo oudot linnut olivat! Tuskin uskalsin henkiä, melkeimpä
pelkäsin, että ne kuulisivat hengitykseni heikon huounnan ja
säikähtyisivät pois. Ja tuijottaissani niihin, kun ne siinä illan harmailla
vesillä uiskentelivat, häipyi kaikki ympäriltäni ikäänkuin siniseen
usvaan — ulappa ja ranta ja keltanen iltataivas — ja minä näin vain
ne valkeat linnut, — ne olivat minusta niin lähellä, että tietämättä
kurotin käteni niiden pehmeitä kauloja silittääkseni. Mutta sitte
pelästyin, että ne olisivat nähneet liikkeeni, ja aatoksissani pyytelin
niitä mitä kauneimmin sanoin jäämään hetkiseksi, edes vähän ‒
vähäseksi hetkiseksi.

Silloin yksi lintu äkkiä nosti kaulansa ja äännähti niin oudon

surullisesti, niin helkkyvän surullisesti, että minä vavahdin siinä
maatessani. Ne levittivät suuret siipensä ja pieksivät vettä, kunnes
se näytti kuohuvalta koskelta. Siten linnut saivat ilmaa siipiensä alle
ja kohosivat pitkässä jonossa lentoon yli järven. Mutta kaikki valittivat
niin surullisesti, että minun rintaani vihloi.

Hyppäsin isäni venheeseen, työnsin sen vesille ja lapsen tavalla

soutaa molskin lintujen jälkeen, sille paikalle, missä ne olivat
uiskennelleet, ja kurottausin laidan yli. Minä tuijotin alas syvyyteen,
ikäänkuin odottaen, että joutsenien kuvaiset olisivat vielä siellä
jälellä. Hohtavan valkonen untuva kellui vedenpinnalla. Otin sen
käsiini ja laskin venheeseen, ja rannalle tultuani panin sen lakkiini
keltasien lehtien sekaan ja juoksin kotia.

Sinä iltana ei teenjuonnistani tahtonut tulla mitään paljaasta ilosta.

Poskeni hohtivat niin punasina, että äitini pelästyi luullen minun
saaneen kuumetaudin. —
 *****

Seisoissani lepikossa ulapan rannalla ja aatellessani poikaa, joka

ensikerran näki ne valkeat linnut, kohosivat joutsenet suunnaten
lentonsa tuhkanharmaata, illanhämyistä kaukamaata kohti.

Nyökkäsin hiljaa niille päätäni jäähyväisiksi: valonpalvelijat,

päivänlinnut, te asujat sinisten ja ikuisten suvijärvien maan, kiitos
että saavuitte tähän harmaaseen ja syyskolkkoon seutuun, kiitos että
herätitte lapsuusunelman eloon sielussani!

Ja niinkuin kerran täytin lakkini keltasilla lehdillä kuvitellen niitä

kultarahoiksi, joilla saattoi ostaa kaiken maailman ihanuudet, etsin
minä nytkin aarteita syksyn kuihtuneiden lehtien seasta, minä
odottelen runojeni valkeita joutsenia, laulun joutsenia, joiden
puvussa puhtauden kirkkaat kaarteet ja unelmain ihmeellinen loisto
säteilee.
 *** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK
SUORASANAISIA RUNOELMIA ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will
be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S.

copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright in
these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it
in the United States without permission and without paying copyright
royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part of
this license, apply to copying and distributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept
and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and
may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following the
terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use of
the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very
easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as
creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research.
Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given
away—you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with
eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject
to the trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
 PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free

distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or
any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and

Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree
to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be
bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from
the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in
paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be

used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people
who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a
few things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic
works even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.
See paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with
Project Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the
collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the
individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the
United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in
the United States and you are located in the United States, we do
not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing,
performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the
work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of
course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg™
mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely
sharing Project Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of
this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name
associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of
this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its
attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it without
charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also
govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most
countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the
United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the terms
of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying,
performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this
work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes
no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in
any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other

immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must
appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™
work (any work on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or
with which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is
accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
 This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United
States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away
or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License
included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you
are not located in the United States, you will have to check the
laws of the country where you are located before using this
eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is derived

from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a
notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright
holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the
United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must
comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through
1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted

with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works posted
with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of
this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project

Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files containing a
part of this work or any other work associated with Project
Gutenberg™.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this

electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg™ License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form,
including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you
provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work
in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in
the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,

performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing

access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
provided that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the
method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The
fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty
payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on
which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your
periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked
as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information
about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation.”

• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who

notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that
s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
 License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and
discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project
Gutenberg™ works.

• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of

any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in
the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90
days of receipt of the work.

• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™

electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend

considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe
and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating
the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may
be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to,
incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a
copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or
damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer
codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except

for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph
1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner
of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party
distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this
agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and
expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO
REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF
WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE
FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY
DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE
TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL,
PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE
NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you

discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it,
you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by
sending a written explanation to the person you received the work
from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must
return the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity
that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a
replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work
electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to
give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in
lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may
demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the
problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in
paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied

warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted
by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any
provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the

Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the
Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any
volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution
of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability,
costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or
indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause to occur:
(a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b)
alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project
Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of

Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.
It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and
donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the

assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a
secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help,
see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
www.gutenberg.org.
 Section 3. Information about the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,

Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website
and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to

the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can
be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the
widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small
donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax
exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating

charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and
keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in
locations where we have not received written confirmation of
compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of
compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where

we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no
prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in
such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make

any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of
other ways including checks, online payments and credit card
donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project

Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed

editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,

including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how
to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.