What influences decision-makers to attack another country when on the brink of war? The main aim of this study is to detect a causal mechanism underlying the decision to attack another country when... Show moreWhat influences decision-makers to attack another country when on the brink of war? The main aim of this study is to detect a causal mechanism underlying the decision to attack another country when on the brink of war, and whether or not this mechanism differs between regime-types. It investigates whether or not regime-type, the nature of the conflict, the power used, and hawkish beliefs of decision-makers matter in this decision. By addressing this question from a political psychological and comparative perspective, this dissertation tests the microfoundations of democratic peace theory simultaneously with alternative theories of decision-making during conflict resolution.The core analytical instrument is a decision-making experiment, executed in the US, Russia, and China. The experimental results are triangulated with a large N-study, and a case study. The overall results show that although the democratic peace as an empirical regularity might still be valid, the theoretical arguments to explain why democracies do not fight with each other turn out to be built on empirically unsupported foundations. This study argues that an actor-based approach towards decision-making processes within international relations offers important insights to the more structured-based theories of international relations. It thereby convincingly shows that the individual matters, also in IR. Show less
The notion of evil is not undisputed in contemporary philosophy and theology. Reconsidering Evil attempts a regauging of this notion by comparing four different approaches to the theme of evil.... Show moreThe notion of evil is not undisputed in contemporary philosophy and theology. Reconsidering Evil attempts a regauging of this notion by comparing four different approaches to the theme of evil. Paul Ricœur’s approach via symbols of evil provides a focus that enables an analysis and comparison of the highly reflective views of Immanuel Kant, Karl Jaspers and Karl Barth – who represent an ethical, tragic and a non-theodician theological view respectively. This book sets out to determine whether one can claim that speaking of evil is most at home in a specific way of thinking, with the hypothesis that the latter will turn out to be a religious way of thinking. In the final chapter the notion of "the end of evil" turns out to be very important for understanding the specific character of a religious view of evil. In comparison with Kant's ethical view and Jaspers' tragic one, the broadest or richest understanding of evil is to be found in a religious context. However, this comparison also shows the possible dangers of a religious view. Thus, by means of an in-depth analysis of these thinkers, the relevance of the theme of evil for present-day philosophy of religion is critically examined. Show less
