Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
Overview of neo-Kantian and neo-Hobbesian theories
Neo-Kantian theories heavily borrow from the philosophy of Immanuel Kant. The theories seem to downplay the influence of intuition in the explanation of philosophical concepts. Neo-Kantian theorists attempt to explain the role of interest in the establishment of moral systems and how self-interest can play out in the development of rational norms. Rational norms are critical to the establishment of moral systems of governance.
On the other hand, the neo-Hobbesian theories borrow from the philosophical teachings of Thomas Hobbes. The theories emphasize the role of individuals in embracing rationality. This is critical to the enhancement of morality in society. Neo-Hobbesian theories insist on the role of individuals in embracing humanity. These perspectives are expounded in contemporary global politics (Paul, 2007).
The analytical partnership between neo-Kantian and neo-Hobbesian theories
Both theories help in expanding on the contemporary developments in the present political environment that has become increasingly dynamic. The neo-Kantian theories seem to present a view that is founded on pessimism in the contemporary world that is marked by the politics of dominance. The neo-Kantians argue that the future global world will be characterized by economic prosperity backed by growth in democratization. On the contrary, the neo-Hobbesian theorists attempt to present a more pessimistic view of the political order in the world (Gaus, 1999). Their argument is based on the increased strain in attaining political order in global politics. The mere fact that these two theories present different pictures of political affairs in the world stage justifies their close relationship (Binnendijk & Kugler, 2006).
Justifying the analytical partnership between neo-Kantian and neo-Hobbesian theories
The neo-Kantian and neo-Hobbesian theories have a pronounced relationship that can be explained using the prevailing nature of the global political economy and the interplay of states in the global political economy. There are both positive and negative prospects of development. These are denoted by the factors of globalization that indicate the need for the states of the world to work together in promoting a cooperative environment. This environment is needed to attain what is referred to as global development. This is depicted in neo-Kantianism. The current efforts by states to formulate organizations that can foster cooperation and promote peace exemplify the neo-Kantian theories. However, there is the question of interests and dominance in global politics where nations seek to safeguard power and influence over other states (Gaus, 2004). These factors impact negatively on the efforts to promote cooperation in development and governance. This is exemplified in the neo-Hobbesian theories. According to Prichard (2010), there are two main forces that are playing out in the contemporary political environment: the force that seeks to promote global development through cooperation in political and economic governance, and the pressure of nations to exercise dominance and the pursuance of national interests that are considered to be individualistic.
According to Müllerson (n.d.), the essence of the political events denotes peace on the one hand and conflict, on the other hand. Peace, as explored in the neo-Kantian theories, is negated by the aspects of conflict in the neo-Hobbesian theory. It can, therefore, be concluded that the nature of political discourse in the global political economy is marked by events that denote optimism and pessimism. Thus, the analytical relationship that is founded in the two theories is critical in justifying the two diverse political discourses in the world.
References
Binnendijk, H., & Kugler, R. L. (2006). Seeing the elephant: The U.S. role in global security. Washington, D.C.: National Defense Univ. Press
Gaus, G. F. (1999). Social philosophy. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
Gaus, G. F. (2004). Handbook of political theory. London: Sage.
Müllerson, R. (n.d.). From democratic peace theory to forcible regime change. Web.
Paul, E. F. (2007). Liberalism: Old and new. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Prichard, A. (2010). Rethinking anarchy and the state in IR theory: The contributions of classical anarchism. School of Sociology, Politics, and International Studies, University of Bristol, Working Paper No. 03-10. Web.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.