Search

In secondary literature, especially among orientalists, it is a frequent misperception that Ibn Khaldun was a loyal student of Aristotle and the Greek intellectual heritage at large. But Ibn Khaldun was remarkably selective and critical in his approach to the philosophical paradigm and philosophical models, and, in keeping with the general character of the muteakhhirûn period of Islamic thought, did not see any harm in occasionally benefitting certain concepts and models of philosophical accumulation. One of the places where this criticality and selectivity is manifested is his use of Aristotle's famous expression "Man is political by nature." While for Aristotle, this statement reflects a metaphysical and moral conception of the state as a necessary consequence of a human being's essence (nature), Ibn Khaldun interprets this statement solely in the context of sociality and the need for a division of labor to ensure the material existence and security of human beings. Beyond this, Ibn Khaldun does not ascribe a metaphysical and moral meaning and function either to 'umran, which he uses in the sense of sociality, or to the state/mulk, as Aristotle and his Muslim followers such as al-Fârâbî, Ibn Sînâ, and al-Tûsî did. Moreover, Ibn Khaldun criticizes these philosophers for doing so and underlines that the science of 'umran is a different discipline from political philosophy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Political philosophers and theorists make arguments about high-stakes problems. This article shows that those theories would be more credible if political philosophers ensured their work was robust: capable of withstanding reasonable changes to their assumptions and to the cases to which their arguments apply. The world is varied and inconstant. As a result, scientists and social scientists recognize the virtue of robustness. This article shows why political philosophers should also do so. It defines robustness, demonstrates its value, and shows how it can be evaluated. Illustrating the stakes of robustness, the article assesses prominent arguments concerning multiculturalism and open borders. Avoiding misunderstanding and confusion should be a central aim of political philosophy. To sidestep these outcomes and to reassure scholars that one's theory is not subject to concerns about its credibility, it will often be reasonable for philosophers to explicitly test their theories for robustness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What role do normative ideals play in politics? Since Rawls, many political philosophers have advocated what they take to be a Kantian answer to this question. Normative ideals organize and guide political decision-making and action, and a major task of political philosophy is to generate them. Recently, this position has come under renewed scrutiny among political thinkers identifying as realists and nonideal theorists. These critics argue that ideal theory is too remote from empirical politics. This article turns to Kant for an alternative conception of ideals that is both distinct from the Rawlsian account and better withstands the critiques of realists and nonideal theorists. It argues that, for Kant, ideals are aids to freedom; their aim is to guide us towards forms of autonomy we have yet to fully realize. This leaves us with a much stronger view of ideals than does ideal theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hope is in a twofold crises in Western societies: perceived as unavailable by some and as undesirable by others. Against this background, this introduction argues that there is a need to ask anew what (if anything) citizens should hope for. After some introductory remarks both about the current role of hope in the public arena and important developments in recent philosophical debates, I provide an overview of the contributions to the Special Issue. Through a variety of theoretical lenses and from a variety of theoretical backgrounds, the contributors systematically ask which hopes (if any) we should cultivate or whether it may sometimes be necessary to let go of certain hopes. While they agree that hope is indispensable as a way of dealing with our fragility and sustaining our resolve, it is not without dangers. What emerges is a profile of hope as a complex and ambivalent attitude that has so far received too little attention by political philosophers, despite its prominent and increasingly contested role in political practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many Canadian thinkers have devoted works to Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Two relatively recent books, Robert C. Sibley's Northern Spirits (2008) and Robert Meynell's Canadian Idealism and the Philosophy of Freedom (2011), have upheld the thesis that there is a Hegelian tradition native to Canada. For Sibley and Meynell, Hegelian philosophy is a point of intersection that brings together important figures in Canadian political thought of the 19th and 20th centuries. In their view, this group of philosophers represents a distinctive Canadian school. The goal of this article is to provide a critical evaluation of this hypothesis. Is there a specifically Canadian Hegelian school of thought? I aim to show that while Hegel's thought has indeed been received in Canada, this has not led to the formation of a distinct Canadian philosophical school or tradition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mencius is one of the most important master philosophers in the Chinese paradigm and the Confucian tradition, and the article analyzes his philosophizing about politics based on Skinner's hermeneutic method. He is both an interpreter of Confucius and an independent theorist and philosopher in the fields of society. Based on this, in response to the question of what is the political philosophizing of Mencius, the hypothesis of the article considers four hermeneutic processes and considering the influence of mental contexts on the one hand and objective contexts on the other hand, the conventional norms of Mencius' time, including those in favor and against takes into account The favorable norms are in the Confucian school, and the traditional opposing norms are crystallized in Taoist, Mohist and legalist political philosophy. Then, the article imagines and analyzes Mencius' occupations in those norms and observes and expresses Mencius's political philosophizing through it. Based on this process, his affirmative and negative possessions in the conventional norms can be seen in the promise of the legitimacy of the two bases of heaven and earth, the right of revolution, the fusion of ethics and politics, the utopia based on the rule of Hakim-Shahriar, and an educated, virtuous and prosperous nation. Worldly and spiritual progress, meritocracy, political and social justice and peace are received. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this essay on Elster's (2020) book, I expose my concerns about the ability of behavioral tools to correctly address the transition phase between the absolutist regime and the democratic institutions inherited from the French Revolution. Rehabilitating the forgotten analyses of contemporary political philosophers Quinet, de Sade, and Leroux, I defend the view that a correct understanding of the French Revolution's essence lies in its political philosophical dimension, not in the supposed psychological traits of its actors. I suggest a renewed way to apprehend and model revolutions, combining three levels of analysis: political philosophy, macroeconomic dynamics, and complexity economics. (JEL D72, D74, N13, N43, Z13) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Genealogies are an increasingly important part of contemporary political philosophy. However, even recent genealogies differ a great deal in terms of their ends and methods. Strikingly, this has received virtually no discussion in the literature. This article begins to fill that gap. It does so by comparing and contrasting the genealogies of Bernard Williams, Quentin Skinner, and Raymond Geuss, exploring their different goals, methods, and value for political philosophy. This helps us better understand these different kinds of genealogy in their own right; shows the distinct value of each of these different kinds of genealogy to political philosophy; and enables political philosophers to better be able to select the kind of genealogical investigation most relevant to their interests and to employ the correct kind of genealogy better as a result. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While there has long been philosophical thinking on the African continent, it was not until the middle of the 20th century that professional philosophy emerged on the continent. Though traditional African cultures have rich oral histories that some contemporary philosophers explicitly draw upon, it was not until universities emerged that there was philosophy conducted by professional philosophers who published their findings in academic venues. To date, much of this work has been conducted in English. The emphasis this tradition places on the community and social harmony will probably stand out immediately to any reader steeped in the Western philosophical tradition. The articles in this issue represent different styles of conducting African philosophy, such as employing analytic methods in order to develop moral theories, questioning the use of Western epistemic standards, and mining ideas from the history of Africa. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses U.S. president Grover Cleveland's legacy of bringing together populism and classical liberalism. Topics discussed include Cleveland's ranking in the Presidential Greatness Project surveys, author Troy Senik's goal of reviving interest in Cleveland through his book "A Man of Iron," and Cleveland's challenges during his two presidential terms including economic depression and labor unrest.

Copyright of Ciência & Trópico (03042685) is the property of Fundacao Joaquim Nabuco and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Problems / Problemos is the property of Vilnius University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This article asks whether we can identify a vitalistic undertow in Friedrich Nietzsche's philosophy that would make sense for contemporary political and constitutional theory as well. The arguments are presented by contrasting Nietzsche's philosophy with the social theory of Herbert Spencer. After an introduction, the first main part discusses Spencer and his so-called 'organic analogy' in which he draws parallels between natural organisms and the body politic. Spencer's social theory is a paradigmatic example of vitalism and organic state theory and, as a counterpoint, can help tease out Nietzsche's vitalism as well. The article then examines Nietzsche's admittedly fragmentary encounters with Spencer and his flirtations with vitalism and organic state theory. In the conclusions, the reconstructed narrative about Nietzsche's vitalism is linked with Nietzsche's main philosophical works in the hope of provisionally extracting a Nietzschean 'constitutional theory' from his notion of will to power. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article titled "ERNESTO GARZÓN VALDÉS: MEMORY AND LEGACY OF A TEACHER" talks about the life and legacy of Professor Ernesto Garzón Valdés, an outstanding contemporary philosopher of law. The author highlights the importance of his ideas and work, as well as his influence on legal culture in our time. Garzón Valdés was educated at the University of Córdoba and had the opportunity to study with renowned teachers in Spain and Germany. His teaching has left a significant mark on various university centers in Europe and America. Additionally, his ability to generate intellectual debates and his contribution to legal, moral, and political philosophy are emphasized. His work as a diplomat and his commitment to communication between different legal and political cultures worldwide are also mentioned. [Extracted from the article]

The article discusses two books related to historical figures. The first book, "Elisabeth of Bohemia (1618-1680): A Philosopher in her Historical Context," is a collection of essays that explore the life and philosophy of Elisabeth of Bohemia. The essays cover various aspects of her life, including her education, scientific inquiry, friendship with Anne Conway, and political thought. The book provides valuable insights into Elisabeth's contributions and is a valuable resource for researchers interested in her work. The second book is a review of a biography of René Descartes titled "La Vie de Monsieur Descartes" by Adrien Baillet. The biography, published in 1691, is an important contemporary source for understanding Descartes's life. The reviewer praises Annie Bitbol-Hespériès's edition of the biography, which includes annotations and detailed notes, and highlights her previous work on Descartes's writings. [Extracted from the article]

The article is a review of the book "Politics, History, Consciousness" by Eric Voegelin. The book is a translation of a compilation of essays and book excerpts by the German philosopher Eric Voegelin. The work covers topics such as political philosophy, the philosophical science of politics, philosophy in modernity, consciousness and divine reality, and the philosophy of history. The author emphasizes the importance of having prior knowledge of Voegelin in order to fully understand the book. [Extracted from the article]

Copyright of Filozofija i Drustvo is the property of University of Belgrade, Institute for Philosophy & Social Theory and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The role of associations in political life is a long-standing interest for American political theorists. Typically, a vibrant associational life is understood to support democratic institutions and guard against tyranny. Another function, one that has received increased philosophical attention, is the space associations provide for marginalized groups to furnish distinct concepts and vocabularies capable of capturing their members' experiences of oppression. However, in this article, I draw on James Baldwin's reflections regarding the rising popularity of the Nation of Islam, to argue that philosophers should not overlook either the deleterious effects of injustice on people's capacities, even when aggregated into associations, to effectively capture the realities of their oppression or the complex ways in which even morally repugnant hermeneutical resources can usefully serve an association's practical causes. It is therefore necessary to develop additional, more ambivalent evaluative standards to capture the complex knot of epistemic and political functions associations perform. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Without question, Process Philosophy and Political Liberalism: Rawls, Whitehead, Hartshorne, is Daniel Dombrowski's most important and well-argued treatise to date within his growing, prolific literary corpus. Bringing his expertise on John Rawls's political thought to bear on the process thinking of A. N. Whitehead and Charles Hartshorne, he explores commonalities of approach and ventures the interpretive hypothesis that Rawls is, at least broadly speaking, a process philosopher. He also argues that each of these philosophers appropriately shares the appellation "political liberal" when that term is carefully defined. I find this strongly plausible. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Well-functioning modern democracies depend largely on expert knowledge and expert arrangements, but this expertise reliance also causes severe problems for their legitimacy. Somewhat surprisingly, moral and political philosophers have come to play an increasing role as experts in contemporary policymaking. The paper discusses different epistemic and democratic worries raised by the presence of philosopher experts in contemporary governance, relying on a broad review of existing studies, and suggests measures to alleviate them. It is argued that biases philosophers are vulnerable to may contribute to reducing the quality of their advice, and that the characteristics of philosophers' expertise, and controversies around what their competences amount to, make it hard to distinguish proper from less proper philosopher experts. Reliance on philosopher experts may also intensify democratic worries not least due to the depoliticization pressures that the introduction of ethics expertise tends to give rise to. Still, philosophers have competences and orientations that policy discussions and democratic deliberations are likely to profit from. Worries about philosopher experts may moreover be mitigated by means of a proper design of expert arrangements. Confronted with the genuine epistemic risks and democratic challenges of contemporary governance any quick fix is obviously unavailable, but when institutionalized in the right way philosophers' involvement in present-day policymaking bears significant promise. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the book "Hume, Justice, and Modern Political Thought," written by Maria Isabel Limongi and published by Editora Alameda in 2023. The book presents a new perspective on the philosopher David Hume, highlighting his understanding of the concept of justice as a historical, social, and political process. The author analyzes Hume's work in relation to other philosophers and commentators, such as Rawls, and highlights five key moments that reveal the importance of Hume's thinking in the formation of modern political thought. The book also discusses the relationship between the social, the political, and the legal, and how Hume introduces the concept of civil society as a starting point for politics. [Extracted from the article]

Among mainstream political philosophers, Charles Mills is probably best known, not as the author of The Racial Contract, but for his long-running critique of ideal theory and Rawls for his association with it. Yet the critique of ideal theory that followed the publication of The Racial Contract is prefigured in that very work, where we find in inchoate form what would be further developed later on. In the book, this early formulation of the critique occupies a small part of a larger, more general argument condemning mainstream political philosophy for the way that it has ignored race. In this paper, I explore the relation of the critique to this more general argument. It might be thought that the general argument leads inevitably to the critique of ideal theory. I will argue that this is not so. I will show how Mills' more general argument can be made without taking the further step of critiquing ideal theorizing. The blame for why mainstream political philosophy has ignored race, and continues to ignore race, I will argue, should be placed elsewhere. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The work presents the figure of Jacques Maritain and his thought on Human Rights. The text is structured in four chapters. The first one is dedicated to a brief biography, indispensable to understand the development of his ideas. The second is a study on the relationship between the French philosopher and the process of elaboration of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948. The third contains a synthesis of his political philosophy, as an indispensable conceptual presupposition for understanding his conception of human rights. Finally, the fourth chapter is entirely devoted to a detailed description of his thinking on human rights. The reading of this work allows us to discover the life and philosophical-political thought of an exceptional man. His ideas are imbued with the astonishment of one who has discovered the strength and depth of the Christian Message and has grasped its inspirational capacity to give meaning to life in society. In his texts, his interest in showing how the Gospel is called to permeate social structures is evident. The present work also provides an insight into the extent to which his ideas inspired those who drafted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Finally, the French philosopher's explanation of the Christian roots of democracy and of the foundation and content of human rights is particularly valuable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of International Journal of Political Philosophy / Las Torres de Lucca is the property of Revista Las Torres de Lucca. Facultad de Filosofia, Ciudad Universitaria and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Although Hobbes presents his political philosophy as an original theory and without conceptual debts with tradition, a study on his solid humanist training, up to 1630, shows that some theoretical considerations of the Greek and Roman authors are present, although with the cloak of language scientist, in key concepts of the modern philosopher. This article deals with the appropriations that Hobbes has made of two classic historians: Tacitus and Thucydides. The first will show Hobbes how to build a new political configuration, the empire, emerged from civil wars; while the second, how is human nature when man does not recognize a power greater than himself. In these two classical authors, then, the reasons for political order and disorder are presented respectively, a knowledge that will be taken up with interest by the modern philosopher. These appropriations, on the one hand, allow establishing a doctrinal affiliation between Hobbes and these classical authors; and, on the other hand, rethinking the link between tradition and modernity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In some point of view, neither Michel Foucault nor Ibn Khaldun are considered philosophers in the conventional classifications, but both are very important in intellectual and, of course, in philosophical contexts, especially for those who are interested in the deep study of human life from the perspective of political thought. The main concern of two thinkers, one in the 14th century, the other in the 20th century, is the issue of power, although neither of them provided a precise definition of it. In this article, an attempt has been made to show the place of power and domination in the political thought of both thinkers by examining the thoughts of two thinkers. And in search of an answer to this question, how did Asabiyyah and industry of religion in Ibn Khaldun's thought and social control through selftechnology and discipline in Foucault's thought lead to the expansion of the domination of power? This article is written by analytically comparing the opinions of two thinkers based on Ibn Khaldun's most important book called Muqaddimah and Foucault's late works. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review is the property of Cambridge University Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In this paper is proposed to dismantle part of the complexity of the problem of private property in Rousseau in the following way: a) it is a concept that obeys very precise circumstances in the context of the Genevan philosopher, the decay of the feudal world and the advance of the market economy, the evolution of capitalism; b) it is a concept that in the body of his work he thinks and reflects on it as a new reality c) for this concept Rousseau draws on the discussions raised with physiocrats (economists), jurists (jusnatrualist) and both liberal and republican philosophers who due to that they did not conceive their discipline as a science isolated from the others, but that each one kept elements of the others despite its emerging specificity d) In unison with its context, Rousseau proposes to think of property from a political philosophy that integrates four sides, which political, moral, legal and economic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Julian's Letter to Themistius is one of our most valuable sources for understanding Julian's political thought. More specifically, it is perhaps our most valuable source for investigating the extent to which Julian's approach to governance was or was not influenced by his philosophical commitments. Here I focus on this question and argue that, understood in its proper intellectual context, the Letter provides us with good reason for thinking that Julian's political philosophy (and the programme that he implemented as emperor) was profoundly influenced by the Platonist tradition. While Julian does distance himself both from the philosopher-king of the Republic and the lawgiver of the Laws, this should not be taken as a wholesale rejection of the possibility of an applied Platonist political philosophy. A standard Platonist doctrine by Julian's time distinguished between not two but three levels of political reform: the divine ideal of the Republic, the second-best state of the Laws, and a third state, arising from reform. A careful reading of the Letter provides support for the idea that Julian aimed at the latter. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Starting from Jonathan Floyd's contrast between 'mentalism' and 'behaviourism', I argue that, in general, we cannot make sense of a person's behaviour without also understanding the thinking behind it. Floyd claims that 'mentalist' political philosophy is undercut by inconsistency and disagreement in people's political judgements, but the evidence suggests otherwise. The public does not divide up into rival camps as philosophers do, but instead are mostly value pluralists. Conversely, it is unclear what justificatory role is played by the kinds of observed behaviour – insurrection and crime – singled out by Floyd. Failure to resist a political system cannot tell us whether people endorse the principles it embodies. So the system Floyd wishes to defend – 'social-liberal-democracy' – cannot be vindicated as 'the people's choice' simply by producing evidence that it provokes less resistance than alternative systems, past and present. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is a growing recognition that victims of injustice may have privileged access to knowledge about the injustices they experience, and that injustices are perpetuated through silencing victims by taking them to be less credible, and through denying them the platform and capacity to speak. However, these are not ideas that political philosophers tend to engage with in a sustained manner, to the extent that they alter methodological approaches to be systematically attentive to victim testimony. In this article, I provide two arguments in favour of political philosophers attending to victim testimony, one moral, one epistemic, and demonstrate that the moral case has little purchase, but that the epistemic case is more successful. Then, I present the strongest case against including victim testimony in political philosophy, and I argue that it does not hold up to scrutiny. In so doing, I demonstrate how methodological practices in political philosophy could be improved through drawing on feminist social epistemology; attending to victim testimony can enrich political philosophy in epistemically acceptable ways, and it also corrects for a range of potential biases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Among yesteryear Philosophers of Law there seemed to be no more important mission than taking a stand in the debate between law and morality. Among the present-day constitutionalists, it is mandatory to take a stand in the tension between constitutionalism and democracy. In particular, judicial review at the level of normative theory that best corresponds to the institutional arrangements adopted which, in turn, better justifies such practice instrumentally. Latin American constitutionalists have turn at pedagogical, doctrinal and jurisprudential level to well-known primary sources to defend a favorable thesis on judicial review. They have perhaps neglected contributions from historical authors of liberal political thought, such as Benjamin Constant, to contribute to defend the favorable thesis. This article is headed in that direction following in part the relevant work of the Colombian political philosopher, Francisco Cortés Rodas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article we want to offer a different overview, including the Panamanian philosopher Ricaurte Soler and understanding the philosophy of liberation as a broad and heterogeneous movement; moreover, to perceive it as a school of philosophical thought with a transformative political commitment. Throughout its own historical development, it becomes immanent. It is a philosophical movement that remains relevant because it has something to say in these times of war and pandemic, where the affirmation of life becomes the guiding principle for the liberating praxis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of Babylon Center for Humanities Studies is the property of Republic of Iraq Ministry of Higher Education & Scientific Research (MOHESR) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of International Journal of Political Philosophy / Las Torres de Lucca is the property of Revista Las Torres de Lucca. Facultad de Filosofia, Ciudad Universitaria and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Praxis Filosófica is the property of Universidad del Valle and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This article explores the new research area of so-called strategic facts by examining the theoretical interaction between political and military elements in the context of defence. The research methodology uses a systems-thinking approach to conceptual interpretation. Specifically, the article references the work of French philosopher Émile Durkheim and his notion of social facts. The study concludes by suggesting that it is possible to compile an explanatory framework of the political-military nexus at the strategic level of defence by applying strategic facts as a model for defence analysis. It is also possible to identify strategic facts in the area of "defence as politics." Further research into this topic would be useful. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Faced with the issues of the state and politics in modernity, Mou Zongsan's (1909-1995) and Heidegger's (1889-1976) views of the state are grounded in ontology. This article considers how the two great philosophers unfold the political dimension of ontology as well as their attitudes towards modernity and democracy. Basically, they both put forward national socialism and criticize the technology era; however, they depart in that Mou opts for democracy while Heidegger is opposed to democracy. Even though the way they lay the foundation for their politics differs from that of political philosophers, the insights we can gain from their ontological perspective remain noteworthy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This chapter situates comedy and humour in relation to both political life and philosophy. It further introduces two conceptions of comedy, which I call other-directed comedy and deep comedy. Other-directed comedy is, I argue, essentially conservative and promotes social cohesion by ridiculing deviations from communal norms. Because philosophy is committed primarily to the good and not to society as such, it follows that the stance of philosophy towards other-directed comedy is ambivalent and depends upon the stage of the political process. If the social norms that other-directed comedy serves to reinforce are good, then it is good; otherwise it constitutes an obstacle to political reform and progress. Deep comedy, meanwhile, contrasts sharply with other-directed comedy because its ridicule is all-encompassing, taking aim not only at others but at the self itself and its own most dearly held beliefs, customs and so on. Although philosophy has a close affinity with deep comedy, I argue that philosophy turns away from it precisely because philosophy also takes the ephemeral human community seriously and hopes to improve it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This chapter sheds some light on the employment of grotesque humour in the current political scenario. More specifically, I deal with grotesque images exploited and enhanced by populism. In order to unfold my argument, I allude to and apply two often neglected yet fruitful ideas: the idea of carnivalization of politics and the grotesque power of the sovereign. Regarding the first, I appeal to the idea of the grotesque in the Renaissance and more specifically in the French poem Gargantua and Pantagruel by François Rabelais, as well as how it is presented by Russian philosopher Mikhail Bakhtin in his seminal work Rabelais and His World. Bakhtin explains how the carnival allows social hierarchy to be not only suppressed but even inverted for a limited window of time. Regarding the second, I refer to the so-called 'ubuesque' power explored by philosopher Michel Foucault in his lectures Les Anormaux, according to which the ubuesque king has the capacity to enhance and strengthen his power over his subjects by exploiting satire and use mocking as a relief valve. The king of the fools, or the Ubu King, is then crowned as the highest authority in this subverted social and ethical order. Grotesque humour has the capacity to put citizens in a state where conflicting and even opposing feelings, such as amusement and repulsion, coexist on the same level. The coexistence of contrasting feelings may provoke a change in perspective that can influence not only our mood but also our moral compass regarding tastes, pattern of behaviours and ethical issues, creating a new model of leadership that can be internalized by citizens through laughter. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Logos: A Journal, of Religion, Philosophy Comparative Cultural Studies & Art (08687692) is the property of Logos and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Mutefekkir, Faculty of Islamic Sciences is the property of Aksaray University, Faculty of Islamic Sciences and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This article discusses two books: "George Padmore's Black Internationalism" by Rodney Worrell and "The Pan-African Pantheon: Prophets, Poets, Philosophers" edited by Adekeye Adebajo. The first book focuses on George Padmore, a key figure in the struggle against colonialism in Africa and the Caribbean. Worrell provides an overview of Padmore's political thought and his involvement in various organizations. The second book is a collection of biographical profiles of individuals who have contributed to Pan-Africanism. The editor aimed to create a diverse and inclusive pantheon, but the selection has been criticized for its omissions and inclusions. [Extracted from the article]

Power exists and characterizes politics with its contradictions, conflicts and tragicities. Hannah Arendt, political theorist, philosopher, has worked throughout her life to analyze such a paradigm, as well as to make clear what it is and how humans who inhabit the earth must re-act and not immunize themselves to power by thinking critically in act of birth that constitutes the “miracle” of human beings: their being free. The political philosophy theorized by her and discussed here aims to protect individuals from violence and lies. It reveals a thought that can benefit the welfare of plurality. Constructs a theme that is ultimately part of bioethics as a responsible sense of behave and biopolitics understood dialectically as conciliatory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Following the work of John Rawls, political theorists have fixated on the comparative stability of different equilibrium states of justice. This article identifies a crucial gap in this literature, namely, the lack of attention paid to nonequilibrating systems. Drawing on Kakutani's theorem, I present plausible cases in which society will fail to exhibit any equilibrium states of justice. An important implication for political theory is that, rather than focusing exclusively on stable equilibria, theorists should examine dynamic processes of justice, which need not exhibit equilibrating forces. To this end, a concept more useful than stability is that of robustness, or the ability of a system to maintain general desiderata in the face of an evolving conception of justice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Itobiad: Journal of the Human & Social Science Researches / İnsan ve Toplum Bilimleri Araştırmaları Dergisi is the property of Itobiad: Journal of the Human & Social Science Researches and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Bajo Palabra: Journal of Philosophy is the property of Bajo Palabra: Journal of Philosophy and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Humanitas: International Journal of Social Sciences / Uluslararasi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi is the property of Humanitas: International Journal of Social Sciences and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revue Académique des Études Sociales et Humaines is the property of Hassif Benbouali University of Chlef and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This author-meets-critics book symposium engages with Eileen M. Hunt’s concluding book in her trilogy on Mary Shelley and political philosophy, The First Last Man: Mary Shelley and the Postapocalyptic Imagination (2024). It brings together some of the leading scholars of apocalyptic political thought (Nomi Lazar, Alison McQueen, Ben Jones) alongside philosophers and political theorists (David Gunkel, Samuel Piccolo, Eileen Hunt) concerned with the question of the ethical relationship between human artifice and the plagues, real and metaphorical, that beset humanity and the world at large. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]