Given his pride in the civilization which has nurtured him, Onuma Yasuaki would, we assume, be content to be introduced as the leading Japanese international legal scholar. We resist such a classification because it is unfair to him, inasmuch as it diminishes his standing and achievement by confining the comparators to one state; Onuma is simply a great international legal scholar and intellectual thought leader who happens to be Japanese. His many books, papers, and, now, the treatise under review confirm it. But yet another matter is his thesis that the intellectual task of clarifying values as goals for future law-making as well as for appraising current decisions should be steeped in all the great civilizations to ensure that their insights are taken into account. Writing from New Haven, our accord with Professor Onuma’s identification of the problem will be no surprise: we endorse the intellectual task of the clarification of goals as a central responsibility of the contemporary international lawyer but we reject a problem-solving methodology that focuses on the values of a few cultures and civilizations for comparative and integrative purposes. That said, to do justice toOnuma’s magnificent achievementwith its many insights, and to locate our disagreement in only one part of his intellectual edifice, we will first survey and then comment on the main themes of his book before turning to his transcivilizationist thesis and his ambivalence toward what he refers to as the “West”.

中文翻译：

---

在多元文明和文化的世界中，我们应如何制定国际法律目标和评估标准？跨文明世界中的大沼康明国际法回顾

鉴于他对孕育他的文明的自豪感，我们假设大沼康明很乐意被介绍为日本领先的国际法律学者。我们反对这样的分类，因为这对他不公平，因为它将比较者限制在一个状态，从而降低了他的地位和成就；大沼只是一位伟大的国际法律学者和知识分子思想领袖，恰好是日本人。他的许多书籍、论文以及现在正在审查的论文都证实了这一点。但另一件事是他的论文，即澄清价值作为未来立法目标以及评估当前决策的智力任务应该浸入所有伟大的文明中，以确保他们的见解被考虑在内。从纽黑文写作，我们同意大沼教授对问题的认定，这并不奇怪：我们赞同将澄清目标的智力任务作为当代国际律师的核心责任，但我们拒绝关注少数文化价值观的解决问题的方法和文明的比较和综合目的。话虽如此，为了公正地评价大沼的伟大成就及其众多见解，并将我们的分歧定位于他的知识大厦的一个部分，我们将首先调查并评论他的书的主要主题，然后转向他的超文明主义论点和他的矛盾心理走向他所谓的“西方”。我们赞同将阐明目标的智力任务作为当代国际律师的核心责任，但我们反对一种解决问题的方法，该方法侧重于少数文化和文明的价值观以进行比较和整合。话虽如此，为了公正地评价大沼的伟大成就及其众多见解，并将我们的分歧定位于他的知识大厦的一个部分，我们将首先调查并评论他的书的主要主题，然后转向他的跨文明论点和他的矛盾心理走向他所谓的“西方”。我们赞同将阐明目标的智力任务作为当代国际律师的核心责任，但我们反对一种解决问题的方法，该方法侧重于少数文化和文明的价值观以进行比较和整合。话虽如此，为了公正地评价大沼的伟大成就及其众多见解，并将我们的分歧定位于他的知识大厦的一个部分，我们将首先调查并评论他的书的主要主题，然后转向他的跨文明论点和他的矛盾心理走向他所谓的“西方”。