Abstract

In the course of human history worldview controversies often bred conflict. The author attempts to show that an indubitable achievement of the second half of the twentieth century is that many of these conflicts remained in the Popperian world three. Resolution of disputes by way of rational discussion can be inscribed in the critical tradition that evolved in the Ionian school of natural philosophy. The United Nations Organization can be conceived of as an institutionalization of this critical tradition with respect to the political sphere. In other words, it is an organ established to prevent world three conflicts from spinning into world one. The end of the Cold War saw the critical tradition and the corresponding ethic of compromise prevail over the dogmatic approach. This situation was overturned with the advent of American neoconservative thought, which is an expression of quite a divergent normative stance. The far-reaching change in popular moral attitudes, i.e. the departure from the critical tradition, seems to necessitate an overhaul of the UN Security Council in order that it can accommodate the new geopolitical climate. However, the author argues, even the most comprehensive UN reform is bound to fail if the sides do not a priori accept the critical tradition underlying this organization’s functioning