TWO EXTREME VİEWS ON THE NATURE OF MODERN POLİTİCS AND THE PRİNCİPLES OF COEXİSTENCE: HARMONY? CONFLİCT? A COMPARISON OF THE POLITICAL THEORIES OF JOHN RAWLS AND CARL SCHMITT

Emre Aydilek

Makale detayları

TWO EXTREME VİEWS ON THE NATURE OF MODERN POLİTİCS AND THE PRİNCİPLES OF COEXİSTENCE: HARMONY? CONFLİCT? A COMPARISON OF THE POLITICAL THEORIES OF JOHN RAWLS AND CARL SCHMITT

Yazarlar:

Emre Aydilek

Yayıncı:

Mersin University

Ana Başlıklar:

Siyaset Felsefesi

Dergi:

Kilikya Felsefe Dergisi Issue 2, pp.282-311

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

10/2024

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001330331

pISSN:

2148-9327

Anahtar kelimeler:

Özet:

 At the macro level, one of the central problems of social sciences and at the micro level of politics, philosophy, sociology and international relations is how peoples can live together. This article compares the political thought systems of John Rawls and Carl Schmitt, focusing on two contrasting theories for understanding the basic dynamics of modern politics and the principles of coexistence. The theoretical frameworks of the two thinkers are analyzed through the themes of harmony and conflict, and their different ideas on the coexistence practices of modern societies are analyzed in a philosophical and political framework. By analytically evaluating the theories of both thinkers, this comparison reveals their different visions of how they approach the most fundamental problem of modern politics. In conclusion, the article aims to contribute to contemporary political debates by highlighting the contrasts between Rawls and Schmitts theories.

 At the macro level, one of the central problems of social sciences and at the micro level of politics, philosophy, sociology and international relations is how peoples can live together. This article compares the political thought systems of John Rawls and Carl Schmitt, focusing on two contrasting theories for understanding the basic dynamics of modern politics and the principles of coexistence. The theoretical frameworks of the two thinkers are analyzed through the themes of harmony and conflict, and their different ideas on the coexistence practices of modern societies are analyzed in a philosophical and political framework. By analytically evaluating the theories of both thinkers, this comparison reveals their different visions of how they approach the most fundamental problem of modern politics. In conclusion, the article aims to contribute to contemporary political debates by highlighting the contrasts between Rawls and Schmitts theories.

 At the macro level, one of the central problems of social sciences and at the micro level of politics, philosophy, sociology and international relations is how peoples can live together. This article compares the political thought systems of John Rawls and Carl Schmitt, focusing on two contrasting theories for understanding the basic dynamics of modern politics and the principles of coexistence. The theoretical frameworks of the two thinkers are analyzed through the themes of harmony and conflict, and their different ideas on the coexistence practices of modern societies are analyzed in a philosophical and political framework. By analytically evaluating the theories of both thinkers, this comparison reveals their different visions of how they approach the most fundamental problem of modern politics. In conclusion, the article aims to contribute to contemporary political debates by highlighting the contrasts between Rawls and Schmitts theories.

 Makro düzeyde sosyal bilimlerin mikro düzeyde ise siyaset, felsefe, sosyoloji, uluslararası ilişkiler gibi alanların temel problemlerinden biri, halkların nasıl birlikte yaşayabileceği üzerinedir. Bu makale, modern siyasetin temel dinamiklerini ve birlikte yaşamanın prensiplerini anlamaya yönelik iki zıt teoriye odaklanarak, John Rawls ve Carl Schmittin politik düşünce sistemlerini karşılaştırmaktadır. İki düşünürün teorik çerçeveleri, uyum ve çatışma temaları üzerinden ele alınmakta, modern toplumların birlikte yaşama pratiklerine ilişkin öne sürdükleri farklı fikirler felsefi ve politik çerçevede incelenmektedir. Bu karşılaştırma, her iki düşünürün teorilerini analitik bir şekilde değerlendirerek, modern siyasetin en temel sorununa nasıl yaklaştıklarına dair farklı vizyonlarını ortaya koymaktadır. Sonuç olarak, makale, Rawls ve Schmittin teorileri arasındaki zıtlıkları vurgulayarak, günümüz siyasi tartışmalarına katkıda bulunmayı amaçlamaktadır.

Makale detayları

TWO EXTREME VİEWS ON THE NATURE OF MODERN POLİTİCS AND THE PRİNCİPLES OF COEXİSTENCE: HARMONY? CONFLİCT? A COMPARISON OF THE POLITICAL THEORIES OF JOHN RAWLS AND CARL SCHMITT

Yazarlar:

Emre Aydilek

Yayıncı:

Mersin University

Ana Başlıklar:

Siyaset Felsefesi

Dergi:

Kilikya Felsefe Dergisi Issue 2, pp.282-311

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

10/2024

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001330331

pISSN:

2148-9327

Political

political liberalism

modern politics

harmony

conflictSiyasal

siyasal liberalizm

modern siyaset

uyum

çatışma

Sayı

Makale detayları

Yazarlar: Emre Aydilek

Yayıncı: Mersin University

Ana Başlıklar: Siyaset Felsefesi

Dergi: Kilikya Felsefe Dergisi Issue 2, pp.282-311

Belge Tipi: Makale

Yayın Tarihi: 10/2024

Belge Dili: Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.): 2001330331

pISSN: 2148-9327

Sayı

Yazarlar:

Emre Aydilek

Yayıncı:

Mersin University

Ana Başlıklar:

Siyaset Felsefesi

Dergi:

Kilikya Felsefe Dergisi Issue 2, pp.282-311

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

10/2024

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001330331

pISSN:

2148-9327