თანამედროვე პოლიტიკური ფილოსოფია ახალი გამოწვევების წინაშე

Abstract

There was a great onslaught against political philosophy throughout the 70s of the twentieth century. Philosophical disciplines claiming to be scientific put their needs under question. Recent changes in society have left a deep imprint on the nature of political knowledge and the demands for it. Despite this, Leo Strauss has defined political philosophy as the normative discipline of understanding the nature of political objects, which is interested not in “what it is” but “what kind it should be”. The whole armada of political philosophers was engaged in a secret or overt discussion. The dogma-accepted phenomena such as freedom, justice, equality, power, and authority have come to the fore with unprecedented intensity. An entirely new discourse has covered the political field. New concepts emerged; bordering concept, interdisciplinary discourse, etc. In our time, especially Rawls’s view turned out to be a watershed, where it was understood that political philosophy is a branch of the philosophy of morality. Hannah Arendt considered the government to be the first element of politics. Nozick brought the idea of equality to the forefront, and so on. Other thinkers have suggested different discourses. Concepts and categories of political philosophy have transformed. Many thinkers have shared Rawls’s views on the philosophy of politics. However, sometimes they came to a different conclusion. Finally, the theory of justice led many authors to question whether the “theory of justice” undermined important aspects and areas of political life. In modern political philosophy, I have identified three signs that characterize the current situation well. The first liberalism has become the dominant direction today. Liberalism has become the absolute standard of moral and political evaluation today. Liberalism has been transformed into a meta-language, gaining the privilege of being a judge of how others speak a language. Liberalism has assimilated the morality of other directions, as if it enriched, but stood under the danger to become a kind of ideological Esperanto. Today it seems as if no one is the authority to treat with divine trepidation. The “Guru” period is over. Rawls was well aware of the current situation. In a fundamental paper published in 1993, “Political Liberalism” he offered a rather different philosophical point of view. Which allowed him to further define the nature and boundaries of political philosophy in four functions. Naturally, philosophers, political scientists, psychologists, theologians, etc got involved in the fundamental discourse. It is the purpose of my paper to conceptually understand the dilemma problems on the new horizon of political philosophy and to analyze the challenges of new political discourse.