Theoretical and philosophical aspects of the construction of the state and state activity as an abstraction and a real force (dialectical analysis)

Download article
Article

Theoretical and philosophical aspects of the construction of the state and state activity as an abstraction and a real force (dialectical analysis)

Nurlan Nuraliev, Alaida Tailakova, Marat Alymkulov, Aigul Sydykova, Aigul Yesetova

Received 30.01.2026, Revised 07.05.2026, Accepted 19.06.2026

https://doi.org/10.67524/verus1/1.2026.3

Retrieved from Vol. 2, No. 1, 2026

Pages 29-35

Abstract

The aim of this study was to understand the universal principles associated with the political process and to examine the ontological status of the state as both an abstraction and a real force. The study employs the ontological method, the comparative-historical method, Imre Lakatos’s method of rational reconstruction, critical discourse analysis, and the institutional and dialectical methods. In the course of the study, key ontological positions (realism and constructivism) were systematised and compared, and the transformation of conceptions of the state from an objective entity to a socially agreed mental construct was traced. Based on a rational reconstruction of the teachings of the classical thinkers over the last five centuries (N. Machiavelli, J. Bodin, J. Locke, G.W.F. Hegel, J. Bentham, K. Marx, H. Kelsen), the study highlights the process of separating public authority from the person of the ruler and the formation of the concept of sovereignty. A synthesis of opposing views (the thesis regarding the reality of the state and the antithesis regarding its illusory nature) has been carried out, and C. Hay’s position of ‘as if realism’ has been substantiated. It has been established that the state is a conceptual abstraction which, for pragmatic reasons, should be regarded as a real entity in practical politics. It has been demonstrated that demystifying the idea of the state allows one to recognise the distortion of reality that occurs when this concept is applied, whilst retaining an understanding of its power as a dynamic institutional complex for law-making and norm-setting. The necessity of conceptually establishing a new field – ‘political ontology’ – designed to rethink classical political thought and expand the toolkit of discourse on the state is substantiated. The findings may be utilised by academics, political scientists, legal scholars and analysts to establish a methodological foundation for normative legal theory, to assess the legitimacy of institutions of power and to analyse public discourse; they are also suitable for use in higher education institutions when developing specialised courses in the philosophy of law, political science and ontology

References
  1. Abrams, P. (1988). Notes on the difficulty of studying the state. Journal of Historical Sociology, 1(1), 58-89. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6443.1988.tb00004.x.
  2. Adams, I. (1999). The inevitability of political metaphysics. Journal of Political Ideologies, 4(3), 269-288. doi: 10.1080/13569319908420799.
  3. Anderson, B. (2006). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of Nationalism. London: Verso.
  4. Bentham, J. (1789). An introduction to the principles of morals and legislation. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  5. Bodin, J. (1955). Six books of the commonwealth. New York: Barnes & Noble.
  6. Bosanquet, B. (2012). The philosophical theory of the state. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  7. Bourdieu, P. (2015). On the state. Lectures at the college de France, 1989-1992. Cambridge: Polity.
  8. Burman, Å. (2023). Nonideal social ontology: The ontology of social power and social structures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  9. Cremonesi, L., Fulco, R., & Surace, V. (Eds.). (2025). Political ontology, community, and institutions: Roberto Esposito in dialogue with contemporary thinkers. Albany: State University of New York Press.
  10. De Vecchi, F. (2015). Edith Stein’s social ontology of the state, the law and social acts. Studia Phaenomenologica, 15, 303-330. doi: 10.5840/studphaen20151516.
  11. Engels, F. (1884). The origin of the family, private property and the state. Hottingen-Zurich: Volksbuchhandlung.
  12. Epstein, B. (2021). Social ontology. In E.N. Zalta & U. Nodelman (Eds.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford: The Metaphysics Research Lab.
  13. Epstein, B. (2025). Social ontology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/9781009290548.
  14. Freeden, M., Tower, Sargent, L., & Stears, M. (2013). The oxford handbook of political ideologies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  15. Haack, S. (Ed.). (2006). Pragmatism, old and new: Selected writings. Amherst: Prometheus.
  16. Hay, C. (2014). Neither real nor fictitious but 'as if real'? A political ontology of the state. The British Journal of Sociology, 65(3), 459-480. doi: 10.1111/1468-4446.12082.
  17. Hindriks, F. (2011). Making the social world: The structure of human civilization. Economics and Philosophy, 27(3), 338-346. doi: 10.1017/S0266267111000265.
  18. Jessop, B. (2016). The state: Past, present, future. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  19. Karagiannopoulos, Y., & Kondakciu, E. (2022). The ontology of politics: Institutions, movements, agents, action and power. Groningen: University of Groningen.
  20. Kelsen, H. (1928). The problem of sovereignty and the theory of international law: A contribution to a pure theory of law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  21. Knowles, D. (2002). Hegel and the philosophy of right. London: Routledge
  22. Lakatos, I. (1970). History of science and its rational reconstructions. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, 91-136. doi: 10.1086/psaprocbienmeetp.1970.495757.
  23. Lehtinen, M. (2023). Political ontology and imagination: Contours of a democratic imaginary. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland).
  24. Locke, J. (1988). Locke: Two treatises of government student edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  25. Marchart, O. (2018). Thinking antagonism: Political ontology after Laclau. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. doi: 10.1515/9781474413329.
  26. McKeon, R. (1954). Dialectic and political thought and action. Ethics, 65(1), 1-33.
  27. Nozick, R. (2006). Anarchy, state, and utopia. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
  28. Philpott, D. (2020). Sovereignty. In E.N. Zalta & U. Nodelman (Eds.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford: The Metaphysics Research Lab.
  29. Ritchie, K. (2015). The metaphysics of social groups. Philosophy Compass, 10(5), 310-321. doi: 10.1111/phc3.12213.
  30. Rudan, P. (2013). Securing the future: Jeremy Bentham's a fragment on government and the American revolution. History of Political Thought, 34(3), 479-506.
  31. Slade-Caffarel, Y. (2024). Cambridge social ontology: An introduction to social positioning theory. London: Routledge.
  32. Strauss, D. (2006). The rise of the modern (idea of the) state. Politikon, 33(2), 183-195. doi: 10.1080/02589340600884618.
  33. Wodak, R. (2011). Critical linguistics and critical discourse analysis. In J. Zienkowski, J-O. Östman & J. Verschueren (Eds.), Handbook of pragmatics: 22nd annual installment (pp. 50-70). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
  34. Zizek, S. (2011). Hegel and the infinite: Religion, politics, and dialectic. New York: Columbia University Press.
Suggested citation
Nuraliev, N., Tailakova, A., Alymkulov, M., Sydykova, A., & Yesetova, A. (2026). Theoretical and philosophical aspects of the construction of the state and state activity as an abstraction and a real force (dialectical analysis). Journal of Global Political Transformations, 2(1), 29-35. https://doi.org/10.67524/verus1/1.2026.3