摘要：The Limits of International Law received a great deal of criticism when it was published in 2005, but it has aged well. The skeptical, social-scientific methodology that it recommended has become a normal mode of international law scholarship. And the dominant idealistic view of international law that the book criticized is today in shambles, unable to explain the turmoil in international politics. This Essay reflects on the book’s reception and corrects common misperceptions of its arguments.
