Taking the opportunity of this LJIL special lecture, Professor Alter provides an interdisciplinary retrospective that explains, defends and critiques six common visions of international law: The naïve political scientist’s expectations about international law as a fixed reflection of political choices; the legal formalist and structural theorist who believes that formal rules, institutions, and processes should generate similar outcomes in different parts of the world; the Western centric scholar’s notion that one can draw general lessons based on European and American experiences; the liberal internationalist who believes that multilateral processes generate consent based agreements and outcomes; the law and society scholar whose focus on the local can minimize international structural elements; and the international legal sociologist who believes that meanings and practices constitute international law. After reflecting on what each vision captures and misses about international law, Professor Alter identifies the policy stakes of residing within a vision. While we need to draw from multiple visions to understand the hybridity of international law, we also need to understand the implicit presumptions of each vision, as these presumptions generate contradictory prescriptive recommendations.

中文翻译：

---

国际法的愿景：跨学科回顾

借此LJIL特别讲座的机会，Alter教授提供了一个跨学科回顾，解释、捍卫和批判了国际法的六种共同愿景： 天真的政治学家对国际法的期望作为政治选择的固定反映；法律形式主义者和结构理论家，他们认为形式规则、制度和程序应该在世界不同地区产生类似的结果；西方中心主义学者认为可以借鉴欧美经验的普遍教训；相信多边进程会产生基于同意的协议和结果的自由主义国际主义者；关注当地的法律和社会学者可以尽量减少国际结构因素；以及认为意义和实践构成国际法的国际法社会学家。在反思了每个愿景对国际法的捕捉和遗漏之后，Alter 教授确定了在一个愿景中存在的政策利害关系。虽然我们需要从多个愿景中汲取灵感来理解国际法的混合性，但我们也需要了解每个愿景的隐含假设，因为这些假设会产生相互矛盾的规范性建议。