| This thesis is a hermeneutical interpretation of the academic discourse of war accomplished through a political philosophy perspective. It intends to demonstrate that in the works belonging to international relations theory, the academic discourse of war rests on the idea that war is the ultimate horizon of international relations. To consolidate this idea, the academic discourse of war proceed through a process that is characterized by a set of traits. The first objective of this thesis is to highlight those traits: theoricism, denial of the practice, the legitimization by the reference to the classics, the selective use of history, reflection based on extreme cases and resigning thinking. A further aim of the thesis is to show that the academic discourse of war is not only a discourse on war, it is itself part of the practice which assumes, in the political field, that war represents the ultimate horizon of international relations. To achieve these two objectives, a framework for hermeneutical thinking has been articulated. The concepts of realm of intelligibility, understanding horizon and hermeneutical prejudices were forged. The exercise focused on five fundamental authors in international relations theory: Hans Morgenthau, Kenneth Waltz, Robert Gilpin, John Mearsheimer and Samuel Huntington. Some classical writers were also studied: Thucydides, Thomas Hobbes, the Abbot of Saint-Pierre and Jean-Jacques Rousseau.;Keywords. Hermeneutics, Interpretation, International Relations, War, Political Philosophy. |
