Tomás Correia

Civil war is a quite recurrent theme in several academic disciplines, from Political Science to Philosophy. The war of “brother against brother” has filled the imaginary of both academics and the general public, as it manifested itself as a recurrent and relatively common phenomenon. In this essay, I propose a genealogical study of Lenin’s concept of revolution as an instance of civil war, with a special focus on the relationship between Lenin’s thought and the Russian Revolutions of 1905 and 1917. I will pay particular attention to The State and Revolution as an idiosyncratic example of Lenin’s writings regarding the role of the masses in the revolutionary process. In this work, the role of the revolutionary proletariat in the achievement and maintenance of the socialist state, the exertion of post-revolutionary power and the creation of new social structures are thoroughly studied.

The twenty-first century is characterized by drastic changes in epistemology, as a result of academical shifts in important fields since the 60s. The decline of metanarratives – defined by Lyotard as grand-narratives about narratives (which, in turn, legitimate historically-situated events) – provided a fertile research ground for new methodological practices based on sharp critiques of Enlightenment rationality. One of the founding authors of the “postmodern condition” (as Lyotard labels it) is Michel Foucault. Foucault’s archaeological and genealogical project regarding epistemology redefined our conceptual approach to knowledge and its legitimation, by situating both concepts in specific historical contexts, at specific historical times. Recurring themes in the Foucauldian project involve skepticism about objective truths, anti-historicism and subjectivity. In this dissertation, I seek to answer the question “Why is Foucauldian methodology relevant in the (post-)modern world, especially in light of the decline of metanarratives?”. The main goal is to address the role of Foucault’s works in the rethinking of historically given narratives and expose the contingency of practices embroiled in power-knowledge relations, while keeping in mind the dispersibility of the origins of those narratives. This is particularly relevant under the framework of an emptying of over-arching narratives about knowledge and the human condition, i.e., the Lyotardian metanarrative. Human societies are usually seen in a context of a larger narrative to which each of our lives in an element. The metanarrative serves as an umbrella for smaller narratives in which other epistemic and moral narratives find their place. There seems to be a clear intersection in Lyotard and Foucault’s works: the former studies the conditions in which the metanarratives empty themselves, while the latter occupies himself with the archaeological/genealogical study of the narratives within the metanarratives that, in turn, occupy the vacuum left by the original metanarrative. There is, nonetheless, a distinction between both authors: while Lyotard sees this replacement as normative-laden, Foucault focuses on a strictly analytical view of discourse and practice.

Democratic Peace Theory has been an important discussion topic in the International Relations field since the mid-twentieth century, a time when the number of demo-liberal societies rose sharply on the international stage, as a direct consequence of worldwide decolonization processes, eventually becoming the predominant form of government towards the end of the 20th century. In this essay, I will trace back the Kantian origins of this theory to the famous essay Toward Perpetual Peace (1795), which is widely regarded as the philosophical core of the aforementioned theory, since it presented the three tenets that are key aspects of current research projects: republicanism, federations of republics and universal hospitality. I will also address common misunderstandings of Kant’s writings and explore the institutional and normative flaws of the claims proposed by Democratic Peace Theory proponents.

A abordagem foucaultiana à epistemologia rejeita verdades absolutas e enfatiza a construção contingente do saber. Diferente do estruturalismo clássico, que encara fenómenos como subordinados a estruturas fixas, Foucault propôs uma abordagem genealógica para analisar discursos, práticas e relações de poder. O conhecimento não é neutro, mas moldado por mecanismos de poder que influenciam a sua legitimidade. A genealogia foucaultiana, inspirada nas obras de Nietzsche, procura desvendar a forma como diferentes narrativas históricas são construídas e como sustentam verdades socioculturalmente aceites. Nesse sentido, a verdade é um processo dinâmico e discursivo, sujeito a disputas e reconfigurações. O conceito de “dispositivo” foucaultiano destaca a interconexão entre discursos, instituições e práticas sociais. A análise genealógica visa desconstruir narrativas dominantes, promovendo uma visão crítica do conhecimento e da ciência. Consequentemente, o método foucaultiano não procura apenas explicar eventos históricos, mas revelar os processos que os moldaram e as alternativas que poderiam ter sido seguidas.

The term “biopolitics”exemplifies the fluidity of scientific concepts when granted epistemic autonomy, adapting to diverse academic and public discourses. It has been widely—often imprecisely—employed across disciplines such as philosophy, political science, sociology, history, medicine, and gender studies, leading to a fragmented and highly contested conceptual landscape. This paper seeks to recover Michel Foucault’s original articulation of biopolitics, focusing on his dispersed and indirect treatment of the term. Foucault’s work serves as the foundation for applying the prefix “bio”to notions of politics and power, though his archaeological and genealogical approach has since been appropriated across various fields. The interdisciplinary expansion of biopolitics has necessitated a hermeneutical reassessment of its role within Foucault’s broader theoretical project, particularly in relation to biopower. This study aims to clarify these concepts and their epistemic significance.

Edward Said’s Orientalism revolutionized Western scholarship by exposing its deep-seated biases in studying non-Western societies, particularly the Arab-Islamic world. His critique revealed how Western narratives dehumanized the "Orient" through exaggerated differences, exoticization and imperialist assumptions. This intellectual framework, Said argued, distorted objective scholarship, allowing Western scholars to claim superior knowledge over the very societies they studied. This paper examines Said’s arguments and their enduring impact on Political Science, Political Philosophy and International Relations. It explores how Orientalist discourse persists in shaping Western narratives, particularly in the post-Cold War era through scholars like Fukuyama and Huntington, as well as in studies on terrorism and democratization efforts in the Arab-Islamic world. Finally, it analyzes the evolution of Orientalism in its modern, neo-Orientalist configuration, which continues to influence global politics and academic discourse.

The discourse surrounding human nature has remained a focal point of philosophical inquiry, particularly regarding the dialectical tension between agent and structure that has defined the field since the emergence of structuralism in the 1960s. This essay contends that normative behavior is primarily socially constructed, asserting that inherent biological features—traditionally emphasized by the essentialist tradition—exert minimal influence on contemporary decision-making and behavioral patterns. Utilizing a social constructionist framework, the methodology first establishes reality as a direct byproduct of social processes. It then applies a post-structuralist lens to deconstruct the systemic structures that constrain and distort human action, investigating how these frameworks became internalized and tacitly accepted as immutable components of "human nature." Finally, the analysis situates the contributions of social constructionism and post-structuralism within the broader literature, highlighting their role in reframing the ongoing debate between nature and nurture.

Nas últimas décadas, a ética tem emergido como um tema central nas ciências humanas. As preocupações morais têm vindo a merecer destaque como resultado da desintegração da homogeneidade sociocultural da modernidade e a concomitante relativização de valores, moralidade e estilos de vida, o que, para muitos, constitui o cerne da condição pós-moderna. Neste contexto, têm ocorrido algumas tentativas notáveis, especialmente nas tradições pós-estruturalistas e pós-modernistas, para lidar com a dissolução de fundamentos - morais ou não – da contemporaneidade e enfrentar a situação de contingência radical e pluralismo ético que se apresenta a cada um de nós. Simultaneamente, as reflexões sobre a ética num contexto pós-estrutural e pós-moderno têm sido, em grande parte, casuais e esporádicas, em consonância com a sua renúncia à teoria sistemática e predileção por micronarrativas dispersas e conhecimentos locais/contingentes. No entanto, existe uma notável exceção: as obras tardias de Michel Foucault, que desenvolveu uma alternativa à ética moderna. Em essência, Foucault procura desafiar sistemas morais prescritivos, tendo como exemplo arquetípico o imperativo categórico de Kant, visto que esta tipologia de código moral funciona como instrumento de "normalização" do sujeito e de integração do mesmo no aparato de poder-saber. Em contraste, Foucault conceptualiza uma transgressão incessante e lúdica de limites propostos e estruturas normativas, assim como a contínua renovação do sujeito de acordo com critérios auto-estabelecidos, em detrimento de critérios impostos externamente. Ao adotar esta posição, Foucault pretende criar fraturas que potencializam um espaço de liberdade compreendido como um espaço de liberdade concreta, ou seja, de possível transformação do sujeito.