From the dialogue with Thucydides' work, it emerges that the approach to politics as power is primarily a characteristic of the state-centric construction of the world. It is also noted that as the city-state evolves humanistically on the path to democracy, the invocation of power in interstate relations becomes more frequent, and at the same time, the military confrontation becomes more bloody.

Thus, the clarification of the issue of war and its causal basis invites us to reflect on the dialectical relationship between the city as a fundamental society, the state that reflects the internal social relations, and the interstate relationship that confronts the perception of politics as power, authority, or freedom.

Thucydides observes that in state-centrism, the hegemonic will of the powerful opposes the freedom of the weak and that, in this context, the foreign policy of the Powers is inherently tyrannical, regardless of the state. Therefore, the measure of peace and war is interest, and the field of choice is the power relations.

The concept of just or unjust war is approached in state-centrism as a variable subject to power relations, not as a stable political constant. The value of Thucydides' work lies in the fact that it engages with the complete, democratic phase that characterized his time, in contrast to modernity, which the Alemtzian thinker classifies analogously in the early period of elective monarchy.

However, Thucydides' relevance transcends state-centrism, broadly covering the post-state-centric/universal period of social humanity from the perspective of typology of states (essentially democracy) as well as interwar or interstate relations.

This means that the human-centered time in which the Alemtzian thinker is inscribed offers a unique opportunity for modern science to emerge from its epistemological cave, to reflect on the phase through which our era is passing, and to approach it with regard to the change of scientific paradigm. A change that is imposed by the need to understand the phase in which the world of our time has entered, which, although transitional, announces in the long term its establishment in the midst of a state-centric yet comprehensive human-centered period marked by democracy.

Precisely this transitional character of our time creates strong fluidity both within states and in the interstate environment, which foreshadows interesting rearrangements in the field of distribution as well as the invocation of power.