English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In the examination and study of the general methodology of science and philosophy, we have discovered a common fundamental problem of the “paradox of the basic element” that creates inconsistencies in social and natural theory and general ontology and epistemology. Our study of the interactions of states as major international actors leads us to the conclusion that the unsolved “paradox of the basic element” of the general systems theory (GST) applied in the neorealist doctrine of international relations generates apparent fundamental theoretical weaknesses that have to be resolved. Therefore, herein we propose a solution to the paradox of the basic element on an ontological level by showing that not the element, but rather the relation is the basic “entity” of the system. Such an approach, where the relationship is the most fundamental category and plays a primary role in the system, transforms the GST into a relationist theory (systemic relationism) that includes the relevant systemic variables both in the system as a whole and in its subsystems (or elements). At the same time, due to the equivalence of the “paradox of the basic element” with the paradox of existence of anything or everything (usually formulated as “Why everything [that is] exists” [and not just nothing]), our relationist approach proves to be a good methodological tool for resolving this fundamental question of the general ontology. In addition, this new approach seems to resolve even the basic problem of natural philosophy formulated as the origin of natural force (F). The relationism formulated in our study provides an answer for the existence of anything (E) in relation to nothingness (N), and then through equivalence of basic relation and interaction explains natural force(s) (F) studied in physics. The basic relation in form of irreducible and inseparable {E, N} system or {E} <-> {N}, (where E—everything, N—nothingness), represents in the physical world a basic irreducible interaction, e.g., a category of force defined in physics (as intensity of interaction). Thus, by applying the same relationist methodology for understanding the physics of force, we provide a fundamental answer related to the origin of force (in the universe). However, besides natural and social applications, in the present article, we discuss how relationism can be used to resolve controversies in the mainstream political theories of state and to provide new original explanation of the origin of state and causes of social development and change. One of our basic conclusions related to the genesis of state is that this supreme institution was historically (systemically) created as a result of struggle for the monopoly of force when the legal idea of titulus (a title of leader/ruler that could be subject of inheritance) emerged. Rulers (i.e., first kings, as successor of primitive tribal chiefs) developed and established legitimacy and appropriate binding rules or laws related to that supreme title to justify their special status (titulus).

General Philosophy of Relationism and Its Application to the Political Theory of State and Society and Implications on Natural Sciences