Abstract

This study explores the concept of nominalism within the context of Post-Naya Pakistan political discourse. Hobbes asserts that names are freely chosen words, according to him, names are arbitrary creations, not tied to the inherent nature of things but determined by human agreement. They do not naturally reflect objects' essence or qualities but are products of human will. Common names originate from human decisions to assign them to groups of specific objects, rather than from any inherent properties in the external world.[i] Nominalism is a philosophical stance that questions the existence of abstract entities beyond mere names and intersects with political discourse in ways that redefine narratives and power dynamics. In the aftermath of Naya Pakistan's formation, nominalist perspectives have gained prominence in shaping and critiquing political rhetoric, policy formulation, and societal expectations. This study analyses how nominalism influences the articulation of political ideologies, the construction of identity and the negotiation of power relations within the Pakistani socio-political landscape. This paper illuminates how nominalist principles contribute to shaping the contours of the contemporary political discourse in post-Naya Pakistan by examining key speeches, policy documents, and public debates.

[i] Whiteside, K. H. (1987). Nominalism and Conceptualism in Hobbes's political theory. Commonwealth, 1(1).