Political realism is a term with a long history in international relaitons. However, until recently it has not played a major role in political philosophy? Why do you think it became topical, and what are the key novelties it provides in mainstream political philosophy? Perhaps the most popular explanation is that it is a reaction to the abstract normativism of American-type liberal theory, as represented by Rawls and Dworkin. Do you agree with that description? Where would you position political realism on the palette of political ideologies?
David Lewis, Ronald Dworkin, Hilary Putnam and Fraassen, are some names classics of contemporary political realism in political philosophy.
Dear Marcelp, thanks for your fast answer. However, if you take Dworkin and Putnam as political realist, I am very much interestged in your understanding of the term political realism.
Dear All!
Here is a recent publication on our topic: https://global.oup.com/academic/product/political-thought-and-international-relations-9780199556281?cc=hu&lang=en&#
Wouold you like to add to it some other recent publications on the topic?
F
In the discussion of my other question on contemporary political theory one comment says:" I'm somewhat skeptical of those calling themselves "realists" in international relations--or at least skeptical of the American varieties. However, I think there is a perfectly reasonable sense that may be attached to the term, if I were to decide to use it. This is a matter of the aim of accuracy in social and political analysis so as to facilitate good policy and policy decisions. I'm inclined to oppose this to ideology in political thought and to anything overly idealistic." How would you react on that description of political realism?
Dear All,
Here is a recent article on Morgenthau at academia.edu:
https://www.academia.edu/3114491/The_Human_Condition_of_Politics_Considering_the_Legacy_of_Hans_J._Morgenthau_for_International_Relations
Forthcoming in
Philosophy Compass
(2014)
Realism in Normative Political Theory
Enzo Rossi | University of Amsterdam Matt Sleat | University of Sheffield
https://www.academia.edu/6117419/Realism_in_Normative_Political_Theory
Thanks for mentioning my piece, Ferenc. I think Marcelo is talking about modal realism and moral realism, neither of which has much to do with political realism. As to why the latter is popular now, well, I wouldn't say it's popular with the mainstream of the discipline, but it may be popular with those who perceive the mainstream to be in crisis, or plain boring.
Dear Enzo,
you might be right about Marcelo's suggestions concerning moral realism and Putnam. Also with Lewis and perhaps Fraassen (?) about modal realism. But what about Dworkin? And indeed, I do not see the connection between these realisms and political realism.
As for the popularity of political realism, you might be right that mainstram liberalism can look boring. But I suspected some more "political" explanations behind the phenomenon.
A political explanation may be disillusion with the failures of high-minded social democracy. But this certainly has not reached most of the agenda-setting departments and journals, where Rawlsianism or luck egalitarinism and global justice stuff is still dominant.
Dear Enzo, when you talk about this disillusion do you mean things like the European election results?
As for the sociology of the issue, maybe the agenda setting departments are not independent themselves? Perhaps key players can determine the issues to be discussed? Or is it possible that public discussion can make the difference? Or perhaps your earlier point is correct and mainstream political theorising does not really bother about political realism yet?
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Political Science