<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.4 20241031//EN"
        "https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/1.4/JATS-journalpublishing1-4.dtd">
<article  article-type="other"        dtd-version="1.4">
            <front>

                <journal-meta>
                                    <journal-id></journal-id>
            <journal-title-group>
                                                                                    <journal-title>Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi</journal-title>
            </journal-title-group>
                                        <issn pub-type="epub">1308-6979</issn>
                                                                                            <publisher>
                    <publisher-name>Dogus University</publisher-name>
                </publisher>
                    </journal-meta>
                <article-meta>
                                        <article-id/>
                                                                <article-categories>
                                            <subj-group  xml:lang="en">
                                                            <subject>Finance and Investment (Other)</subject>
                                                    </subj-group>
                                            <subj-group  xml:lang="tr">
                                                            <subject>Finans ve Yatırım (Diğer)</subject>
                                                    </subj-group>
                                    </article-categories>
                                                                                                                                                        <title-group>
                                                                                                                        <article-title>POSTMODERN SOLUTION AGAINST INSTRUMENTAL REASON IN THE CURRENT POLITICAL ECONOMY: A CALL TO PRACTICAL-RATIONALITY</article-title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <trans-title-group xml:lang="tr">
                                    <trans-title>MEVCUT EKONOMİ POLİTİKTE ARAÇSAL AKLA KARŞI POSTMODERN ÇÖZÜM: PRATİK-RASYONELLİĞE ÇAĞRI</trans-title>
                                </trans-title-group>
                                                                                                    </title-group>
            
                                                    <contrib-group content-type="authors">
                                                                        <contrib contrib-type="author">
                                                                    <contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">
                                        https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0746-9755</contrib-id>
                                                                <name>
                                    <surname>Çamlı</surname>
                                    <given-names>Ahmet Yavuz</given-names>
                                </name>
                                                                    <aff>MANISA CELAL BAYAR UNIVERSITY</aff>
                                                            </contrib>
                                                                                </contrib-group>
                        
                                        <pub-date pub-type="pub" iso-8601-date="20250722">
                    <day>07</day>
                    <month>22</month>
                    <year>2025</year>
                </pub-date>
                                        <volume>26</volume>
                                        <issue>2</issue>
                                        <fpage>125</fpage>
                                        <lpage>143</lpage>
                        
                        <history>
                                    <date date-type="received" iso-8601-date="20240919">
                        <day>09</day>
                        <month>19</month>
                        <year>2024</year>
                    </date>
                                                    <date date-type="accepted" iso-8601-date="20241225">
                        <day>12</day>
                        <month>25</month>
                        <year>2024</year>
                    </date>
                            </history>
                                        <permissions>
                    <copyright-statement>Copyright © 2000, Dogus University Journal</copyright-statement>
                    <copyright-year>2000</copyright-year>
                    <copyright-holder>Dogus University Journal</copyright-holder>
                </permissions>
            
                                                                                                <abstract><p>Practical rationality is a form of behavior and understanding that synthesizes reason and religious/moral rules. The concept of practical rationality was introduced to the literature by Max Weber and developed by Jürgen Habermas. According to Weber, there is no need to exclude religion in order to act rationally, as in the Christian tradition. In fact, reason can enable more rational behaviors to be exhibited with religious motivation. In this context, the aim of the study is to question the necessity of adopting the dynamic of practical rationality as a postmodern solution against instrumental reason, which has turned the economy into political material in the modern period. In particular, the views of Rawls and Wolterstroff constitute the framework of this study. Indeed, in the Western world of thought and philosophy, belief in the sustainability of instrumental reason has been lost by most segments. Since the liberation theories and formulas put forward are mostly within the framework of modern capitalism, their effects remain low. Rawls&#039; proposal, which influenced the world of thought, does not seem to have overcome these limits. Instead, the belief in the necessity of a practical rationality understanding in which religious and moral principles and reason act together in the fields of politics and economics is increasing. At this point, Wolterstroff added a different dimension to the discussions with his reaction and call.</p></abstract>
                                                                                                                                    <trans-abstract xml:lang="tr">
                            <p>Pratik-rasyonellik akıl ve dini/ahlaki kuralların sentezlendiği davranış ve anlayış biçimidir. Pratik-rasyonellik kavramı Max Weber tarafından literatüre kazandırılmış ve Jürgen Habermas tarafından geliştirilmiştir. Weber’e göre rasyonel davranmak için Hristiyan geleneğinde olduğu gibi dini dışlamaya gerek yoktur. Hatta akıl, dini motivasyon ile daha rasyonel davranışların sergilenmesini sağlayabilir. Bu doğrultuda çalışmanın amacı modern dönemde ekonomiyi siyasi malzeme haline getiren araçsal akla karşı postmodern bir çözüm olarak pratik-rasyonellik dinamiğinin benimsenmesi gerekliliğini sorgulamaktır. Özellikle Rawls’un ve Wolterstroff’un görüşleri bu çalışmanın çerçevesini oluşturmaktadır. Nitekim Batı düşünce ve felsefe dünyasında araçsal aklın sürdürülebilirliğine olan inanç çoğu kesim tarafından yitirilmiştir. Ortaya konulan kurtuluş teorileri ve formülleri çoğunlukla modern kapitalizm anlayışı çerçevesinde olduğundan bunların etkileri düşük kalmaktadır. Rawls’un düşünce dünyasını etkileyen önerisi bu sınırları aşamamış gözükmektedir. Bunun yerine politika ve ekonomi alanlarında dini ve ahlaki ilkelerle aklın birlikte hareket ettiği pratik-rasyonellik anlayışının gerekliliğine olan inanç artmaktadır. Bu noktada Wolterstroff ortaya koyduğu tepki ve çağrıyla tartışmalara farklı bir boyut kazandırmıştır.</p></trans-abstract>
                                                            
            
                                                            <kwd-group>
                                                    <kwd>Economic thought</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>  Rawls</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>  Wolterstroff</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>  Modernity</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>  Democracy</kwd>
                                            </kwd-group>
                                                        
                                                                            <kwd-group xml:lang="tr">
                                                    <kwd>ekonomik düşünce</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>  Rawls</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>  Wolterstroff</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>  Modernite</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>  Demokrasi</kwd>
                                            </kwd-group>
                                                                                                            </article-meta>
    </front>
    <back>
                            <ref-list>
                                    <ref id="ref1">
                        <label>1</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Audi, R. (2020). Religion &amp; democracy: Interactions, tensions, possibilities. Daedalus, 149(3), 5-24, https://doi.org/10.1162/daed_a_01800</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref2">
                        <label>2</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Aytaç, C. K. (2020). Üst Kademe Teorisi Bağlamında Yöneticilerin Bireysel Değerlerinin Stratejik Karar Verme Sürecine Etkisini Anlamaya Yönelik Bir Araştırma. Bursa: Uludag University, Social Sciences Institute, Doctoral Thesis.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref3">
                        <label>3</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Beek, K. V. and Wolterstorff, N. (2019). Call for Justice: From Practice to Theory and Back. Eugene: Wipf and Stock Publishers.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref4">
                        <label>4</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Besch, M., T. (2022). Patterns of justification: On political liberalism and the primacy of public justification. Journal of Social and Political Philosophy, 1(1), 47-63, https://doi.org/ 10.3366/jspp.2022.0006</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref5">
                        <label>5</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Bonefeld, W. and O’Kane, C. (2022). Adorno and Marx: Negative dialectics and the critique of political economy. New York: Bloomsbury Publishing.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref6">
                        <label>6</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Brooks, T. (2021). Capabilities compatible with political liberalism? A third way. Croatian Journal of Philosophy, 21(62), 237-250, https://doi.org/10.52685/cjp.21.62.1</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref7">
                        <label>7</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Cohn, T. and Hira, A. (2020). Global Political Economy: Theory and Practice. London: Routledge.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref8">
                        <label>8</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Cooke, M. (2018). A Secular State for a Postsecular Society? Postmetaphysical Political Theory and the Place of Religion. Jürgen Habermas, Volumes I and II. 479-493. London: Routledge.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref9">
                        <label>9</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Cordero, T. (2023). Should liberal democracies accept religious arguments in public debate? A reflection on the thought of Nicholas Wolterstorff and Joseph Ratzinger. Prudentia Iuris, 95, 4760, https://doi.org/10.46553/prudentia.95.2023.pp.47-60</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref10">
                        <label>10</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Çamlı, A. Y. (2021). Individual’s potential to perform ‘fair action’ in business life: J. Rawls and A. Sen. İş Ahlakı Dergisi, 14(1), 63-85. https://doi.org/10.12711/tjbe.2021.14.1.0171</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref11">
                        <label>11</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Evsel, G. (2021). Üremeye yardımcı teknoloji yasaklarına karşılık pratik-rasyonel davranış. Sosyoloji Araştırmaları Dergisi, 24(1), 216-246, https://doi.org/10.18490/sosars.911397</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref12">
                        <label>12</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Forrester, K. (2022). Liberalism and social theory after John Rawls. Analyse &amp; Kritik, 44(1), 1-22, https://doi.org/10.1515/auk-2022-2020</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref13">
                        <label>13</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Friedline, M. L. (2018). Pluralism and the roots of social conflict: rethinking Rawls. Religions, 10(1), https://doi.org/10.3390/rel10010020</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref14">
                        <label>14</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Giovanola, .B and Sala, R. R. (2022). The reasons of the unreasonable: Is political liberalism still an option?. Philosophy &amp; Social Criticism, 48(9), 1226-1246, https://doi.org/ 10.1177/01914537211040568</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref15">
                        <label>15</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Guriev, S. and Papaioannou, E. (2022). The political economy of populism. Journal of Economic Literature, 60(3), 753-832, https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.20201595</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref16">
                        <label>16</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Gailmard, S. (2021). Theory, history, and political economy. Journal of Historical Political Economy, 1(1), 69-104, http://dx.doi.org/10.1561/115.00000003</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref17">
                        <label>17</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Gill, E. R. (2020). Religious values in liberal democracy. Religions, 11(12), 682, https://doi.org/10.3390/rel11120682</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref18">
                        <label>18</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Horkheimer, M. and Adorno, T. W. (2010). Aydınlanmanın diyalektiği. İstanbul: Kabalcı Yayınları.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref19">
                        <label>19</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Horvat, B. (2020). Political economy of socialism. London: Routledge.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref20">
                        <label>20</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Joustra, R. (2020). The coordinates of covenantal pluralism: Mapping pluralist theory in the 21st century. The Review of Faith &amp; International Affairs, 18(4), 18–34, https://doi.org/10.1080/15570274.2020.1834994</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref21">
                        <label>21</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Kędziora, K. (2021). Habermas on Rawls and the normative foundations of democracy. European Journal of Social Theory, 24(4), 545-561, https://doi.org/10.1177/1368431020985416</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref22">
                        <label>22</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Kelly, T. (2001). Sociological not political: Rawls and the reconstructive social sciences. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 31(1), 3-19, https://doi.org/10.1177/004839310103100101</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref23">
                        <label>23</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Lefebvre, A. (2024). Stanley Cavell, John Rawls and moral perfectionism in liberal democracy. European Journal of Political Theory, 0(0), 1-20, https://doi.org/10.1177/14748851241240310</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref24">
                        <label>24</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Oliver, A. (2023). A political economy of behavioural public policy. London: Cambridge University Press.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref25">
                        <label>25</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Raekstad, P. (2024). The radical realist critique of rawls: A reconstruction and response. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 27(2), 183-205, https://doi.org/10.1080/13698230.2021.1891377</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref26">
                        <label>26</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Rawls, J. (2007). Siyasal liberalizm. çev. Fevzi Bilgin. İstanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref27">
                        <label>27</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Rawls, J. (1999). The law of peoples: With “the idea of public reason revisited. NY: Harvard University Press.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref28">
                        <label>28</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Reid, A. (2022). How can political liberalism respond to contemporary populism?. European Journal of Political Theory, 21(2), 299-320, https://doi.org/10.1177/1474885120911305</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref29">
                        <label>29</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Smith, S. (2021). Historicizing Rawls. Modern Intellectual History, 18(4), 906-939, https://doi.org/10.1017/S147924432000044X</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref30">
                        <label>30</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Shaw, J. (2020). Justice in Emmanuel Levinas and John Rawls. International Journal of Philosophical Studies, 28(4), 471-487, https://doi.org/10.1080/09672559.2020.1805489</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref31">
                        <label>31</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Shojaei, Z. (2018). The role of religious reasons in the public sphere: A debate between John Rawls and Nicholas Wolterstorff. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Saskatchewan.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref32">
                        <label>32</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Siddique, M. Z. (2021). The irreconcilable conflict between Islam and liberalism. Islamic Studies, 60(3), 247-265.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref33">
                        <label>33</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Weber, M. (1978). Economy and society. California: University of California Press.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref34">
                        <label>34</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Weber, M. (1950). The Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism. New York: Charles Scripner’s Son.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref35">
                        <label>35</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Wolterstorff, N. (2023). Fidelity in politics: Hallmarks of Christian political activity in the tradition of reformed Protestantism. Christian Scholar&#039;s Review, 52(3), 9-20.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref36">
                        <label>36</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Wolterstorff, N. (2018). Acting liturgically: Philosophical reflections on religious practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref37">
                        <label>37</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Wong, B. (2023). Is it sectarian for a Rawlsian state to coerce Nozick? On political liberalism and the sectarian critique. Philosophia, 51(1), 367-387, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-021-00351-5</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                            </ref-list>
                    </back>
    </article>
