Politicization of social ontology and its paradoxes
Kerimov T.Kh.,
Ural Federal University named after the first President of Russia B.N. Yeltsin, Ekaterinburg, Russia, kerimovt@mail.ru
elibrary_id: 150840 | ORCID: 0000-0002-2286-8412 | RESEARCHER_ID: A-9669-2019
Article received: 2024.04.04 21:16. Accepted: 2024.07.03 21:16
DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2025.01.04
EDN: CVFLXY
Kerimov T.Kh. Politicization of social ontology and its paradoxes . – Polis. Political Studies. 2025. No. 1. https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2025.01.04. EDN: CVFLXY (In Russ.)
The article reveals the historical and theoretical prerequisites for the ontological turn in political theory and the establishment of postfoundationalism, and develops a critical analysis of its inherent paradoxes and difficulties. The ontological turn in political theory became widely known in the first decades of the 21st century. The article argues that postfoundationalism represents a reaction to the dominance of foundationalism in the social sciences, according to which politics is reduced to a subsystem of society, and the ontology of politics is reduced to the regional field of social ontology. The need to overcome foundationalism and its consequences is determined by the formation of a postfoundational political ontology of society. The latter accepts as the main principle of interpretation the position about the contingency of the foundation of society and politics and, as a consequence, about the politicization of social ontology. It is shown that an attempt to shift the meaning of political ontology encounters some difficulties. Firstly, postfoundationalism, which posits the contingency of the foundation of society and politics, falls into contradiction and reveals its dependenceon foundationalism. Secondly, the provision of contingency does not entail ethical-normative principles prescribing specific forms of politics. Thirdly, postfoundationalism entails the loss of prospects for individual positions and projects of people, the possibility of their connection with strategic issues of social development. The general thesis of the article is that renewal ontology in postfoundationalism requires historicizing the interpretation of the social and political, turning to the institutional and normative mechanisms of both the representation and the formation of political subjectivity. The argumentation of this thesis is carried out in three stages, which predetermined the structure of the article. The first part discusses the ontological turn in political theory and the motives for constructing postfoundationalism. The second part substantiates the basic principles of postfoundational political ontology. The third part explains the paradoxes of postfoundationalism and analyses their consequences.
References
Arditi, B. (2007). Post-hegemony: politics outside the usual post-Marxist paradigm. Contemporary Politics, 13(3), 205-226. https://doi.org/10.1080/13569770701467411
Butler, J. (1992). Contingent foundations: feminism and the question of “postmodernism”. In J. Butler, & J. W. Scott (Eds.), Feminists Theorize the Political (pp. 3-21). New York: Routledge.
Brown, W. (2008). Regulating aversion: tolerance in the age of identity and empire. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Campbell, D., & Morton, S. (2008). Introduction: Pluralism “Old” and “New”. In D. Campbell, & M. Schoolman (Eds.), The New Pluralism: William Connolly and the Contemporary Global Condition (pp. 1-16). Durham: Duke University Press.
Chin, C. (2021). Just what is ontological political theory meant to do? The method and practice of William E. Connolly. Political Studies, 69(4), 771-790. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032321720925491
Connolly, W. E. (1995). The ethos of pluralization. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Herzog, D. (1985). Without foundations. Justification in political theory. Ithaca; London: Cornell University Press.
Laclau, E. (1990). New reflections on the revolution of our time. London; New York: Verso.
Laclau, E., Mouffe, Ch. (1994). Hegemony: the genealogy of a concept. In Hegemony and Socialist Strategy. Toward a Radical Democratic Politics (pp. 7-46). London: Verso.
Laclau, E. (1995). “The time is out of joint”. Diacritics, 25(2), 86-96. https://doi.org/10.2307/465146
Laclau, E. (2004). Glimpsing the future. In S. Critchley, & O. Marchart (Eds.), Laclau: A Critical Reader (pp. 279-328). London; New York: Routledge.
Marchart, O. (2007). Post-foundational political thought: political difference in Nancy, Lefort, Badiou and Laclau. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Mihai, M., McNay, L., Marchart, O., Norval, A., Paipais, V., Prozorov, S., & Thaler, M. (2017). Democracy, critique and the ontological turn. Contemporary Political Theory, 16(4), 501-531. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41296-017-0140-0
Mouffe, Ch. (2005). On the political. London: Routledge.
Paipais, V. (2017). Political ontology and international political thought. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Rawls, J. (1985). Justice as fairness: political not metaphysical. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 114(3), 223-251.
Rosenthal, I. (2019). Ontology and political theory: a critical encounter between Rawls and Foucault. European Journal of Political Theory, 18(2), 238-258. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474885116659633
Thomassen, L., & Tender, L. (Eds.) (2005). Radical democracy: politics between abundance and lack. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
White, S.K. (2000). Sustaining affirmation: the strengths of weak ontology in political theory. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Wiley, J. (2016). Politics and the concept of the political: the political imagination. London: Routledge.
Zizek, S. (2000). Holding the place. In J. Butler, E. Laclau, & S. Zizek (Ed.s), Contingency, Hegemony, Universality: Contemporary Dialogues on The Left (pp. 308-329). London: Verso.
Zizek, S. (2008). For they know not what they do. London: Verso.
Fedorova, M.M. (2016). Ponyatie demokratii i ontologizatsiya politicheskogo: Klod Lefor [The concept of democracy and the ontologization of the political: Claude Lefort]. In M.M. Fedorova (Ed.), Politicheskoe kak problema. Ocherki politicheskoi filosofii XX veka [The Political as a Problem. Essays in Political Philosophy of the 20th Century] (pp. 125-140). Moscow: Idea-Press. (In Russ.)
Gaman-Golutvina, O.V. (2019). Overcoming methodological differences: the debate about knowledge politics in an age of uncertainty. Polis. Political Studies, 5, 19-42. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2019.05.03
Heidegger, M. (2001). Die grundprobleme Der phanomenologie. (Russ. ed.: Heidegger, M. Osnovnye problemy fenomenologii. St. Peterburg: Vysshaya filosofsko-religioznaya shkola).
Kerimov, T. Kh. (2022). The “ontological turn” in the social sciences: the return of epistemology. Russian Sociological Review, 21(1), 109-130. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17323/1728-192x-2022-1-109-130
Luhmann, N. (2007). Soziale Systeme. Grundriss Einer Allgemeinen Theorie. (Russ. ed.: Luhmann, N. Sotsial'nye sistemy. Ocherk obshchei teorii. St. Petersburg: Nauka).
Ranciere, J. (2006). Aux bords du politique. (Russ. ed.: Ranciere, J. Na krayu politicheskogo. Moscow: Praxis).
Ricreur, P. (2002). Politicheskii paradoks [The political paradox]. In Istoriya i istina[History and Truth] (pp. 287-315). St. Petersburg: Aletheia. (In Russ.)
Smorgunov, L.V. (2020). Ontological turns in contemporary political science: in search for compliance with politics. Socialnye i gumanitarnye znania, 6(2), 122-133. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.18255/2412-6519-2020-2-122-133
Schmitt, C. (2016). Der Begriff des Politischen (Russ. ed.: Schmitt, C. Ponyatie politicheskogo. St. Petersburg: Nauka).
See also:
Kostyuk K.N.,
Orthodox Fundamentalism. – Polis. Political Studies. 2000. No5
Levytskyy V.S.,
The philosophy of politics – political philosophy – political science: articulation of the problem area. – Polis. Political Studies. 2024. No1
Smorgunov L.V.,
Political identity and the concept of the political. – Polis. Political Studies. 2012. No6
Kharkevich M.V.,
Overcoming the apocalypse in the pluralistic space of poetics and politics. – Polis. Political Studies. 2024. No2
Shestopal Ye.B.,
Introducing the section. The human dimension of politics. – Polis. Political Studies. 2013. No6