Morgenthau and Objectivity

Does Morgenthau contradict himself in relation to what constitutes an objective and rational science of International Relations?

INTRODUCTION

In Scientific Man versus Power Politics Hans J. Morgenthau argues against scientific approaches that conceptualize "the social and physical world as being intelligible through the same rational processes" (Morgenthau,1946:2-3). In his later work Politics Among Nations, however, he attempts to construct an ‘science' of international relations based on his argument that "politics, like society in general, is governed by objective laws that have their roots in human nature" (Morgenthau,1984:4). At the first glance, these two positions on the possibility of constructing an objective and rational science of political interaction seem inherently contradictory.

However, this essay will argue that he does not fully contract himself, although his approach faces an inherent tension between abstracting from reality to make the social world intelligible and grounding his theory in empirical observation. Part I will discuss the distinction between rationality rather then rationalism. Part II will then commence to show that his ‘objective laws' that it is guided by interest defined in terms of power is actually a very flexible concept that can take into account social and political contingencies. However, Part III will then show that there is an inherent tension between empiricism and Weberian ideal types in his work.

Part I: RATIONAL AND OBJECTIVES SCIENCE

Morgenthau's aim to create a ‘rational and objective science' of international relations is in itself not contradictory with his earlier condemnation of rationalism due to the distinction he makes between rationalism, that claims to be objective, and rationality, an effective tool to understand social reality.

In Scientific Man versus Power Politics Morgenthau condemns the dominance of rationalism and deductive reason since this fails to conceptualise the social world. Rationalism has "misunderstood he nature of man, the nature of the social world and the nature of reason itself" because it omits the biological and spiritual dimension of human nature and "misconstrues the function reason fulfils within the whole of human existence…it perverts the natural sciences into an instrument of social salvation" (Morgenthau,1946:5). Central to his critique is the notion that the social sphere is fundamentally different from the natural sphere (Morgenthau,1946:215). The false belief in the "essentially rational nature of social action…has obscured the true character of social action" (Morgenthau,1946:213). Scientific rationalism with its simple, abstract and consistent nature is thus deemed inadequate to be applied to the complicated, incongruous and concrete social reality (Morgenthau,1946:10).

However, rather then dispensing with rationality fully, Morgenthau sees the need for a type of reason different form the rationalistic approach to give meaning to the social world. He rejects the observer/observed divide of rationalism due to his realization that facts do not exists outside the social context. The observing scientist can therefore not escape his own subjective perception and "stands in the streams of causation as an acting and reacting agent" (Morgenthau,1946:143). Nevertheless, we need to make the attempt to make sense of our complicated social reality. According to Morgenthau, "Politics must be understood through reason, yet it is not reason that it finds its model" (Morgenthau,1946:10). As such he distances himself from rationalism's illusion of absolute knowledge and instead proclaims that the contingencies of the social world can be made knowledgeable through employing a rational approach to history and empirical facts in a limited and partial way (Molloy,2006:77). The task of reason is to conceptualize how different social factors and conditions bear on specific social problems, always subject to uncertainty (Morgenthau,1946:218). The reason of the statesmen and the social scientist includes his own social construction of reality (Spegele,1996:170-171). When Morgenthau aims to approach international relations through a rational theory, it is not a priori reason of rationalism that he tries to find in the conduct of international politics, but rather rationality is a socially conditioned approach that makes it intelligible to us.

Central to the rationality that Morgenthau employs to make sense of the social world is his acknowledgement of the tragedy of the human condition that results in a different notion of truth. It is the tragedy of human existence that we cannot full and completely comprehend reality and human reason