The article reflects on the idea of the «The Rule of Law» (in the continental tradition «Der Rechtsstaat»; in Russia «pravovoe gosudarstvo») within contemporary debates on the meaning of this concept. The discussion is approached through the work of Jeremy Waldron, a New Zealand–American philosopher and legal theorist, in his recent paper «Thoughtfulness and the Rule of Law» (2023). Debates about the rule of law are often polarized between advocates of a “thin” conception, which limits the concept to the formal and procedural features of legal order, and defenders of a “thick” conception, which links it to substantive moral and political values. In addition, new interdisciplinary socio-legal studies interpret the Rule of Law not only as a legal ideal but also as a social practice rooted in institutions, norms, and cultural traditions of particular societies. Waldron considers this interpretation plurality as an inherent characteristic of the concept and, following W. B. Gallie, identifies it as an «essentially contested concept». His own position advances a hybrid approach that combines a critique of «casual legal positivism» with an acknowledgment of the normative value of the procedures underpinning the legal system. For Waldron, the Rule of Law is not merely the limitation of power or the guarantee of legal certainty, but also an expression of respect for human dignity, citizens’ agency, and their capacity for self-application of legal norms. He resists privileging any single political or moral value, insisting instead that law should be understood as a social practice in which legislation, administrative processes, and judicial decisions form a space of thoughtful participation.