A stimulus may be given to the interpretation of Plato's Philebus by no longer ignoring the impact of Plato's political philosophy. A first hint is the occurrence of astasiastotatēn, a notion exclusively functioning within Plato's politi¬cal philosophy and no less surprising, in the 'non-political' Philebus, than 'Friday's Footprint' was to Crusoe. A second hint is the stasis between epistēmai and hēdonai, only to be avoided by the exclusion of hēdonai unwilling to subordinate themselves to phronēsis/nous. A (...) new reading of Philebus in light of these 'footprints' leads to the conclusion that not only the 'digressions' on ontology, cosmology and anthropology but also the analyses of hēdonai and epistēmai — in other words: the main body of Philebus — presuppose the substratum of Plato's political philosophy. Consciousness of this substratum contributes to understanding the content and course of the dialogue, and even to recognizing its unity. (shrink)

This has become a key concern of contemporary political philosophy and this book introduces readers to the materials required to address it." "This is the first comprehensive survey of a highly topical issue and its multidisciplinary approach will make it of relevance to courses in philosophy, politics, sociology and cultural studies, as well as of interest to the general reader."--BOOK JACKET.

This chapter briefly reviews the link between Charles Taylor's life and work. It then discusses his position on the role of science in understanding human behavior. It concludes by considering the relationship between theory and practice in Taylor's thought.

Metzger continues the effort started in _A Cloud Across the Pacific_ (The Chinese University Press, 2005) by viewing modern Chinese thought as political philosophy; placing it in a sociological context, noting its causal relationship with paideia; examining its historical context by emphasizing the lines of continuity with the Confucian tradition; and exploring its comparative context by describing it as sharing an agenda with and diverging from the leading forms of Western liberalism. East and West, he argues, are ivory (...) towers that use their rationalistic philosophies to insist that the great disasters of history are caused mainly by the bad decisions of political leaders, instead of seeing how their own philosophical discourses lend credibility to these decisions and trying to improve these discourses by uncovering their culturally inherited premises. In an increasingly democratic era when political philosophy is no longer viable as a theory of global-political evolution and as public criticism increasingly affects leadership decisions, Metzger seeks to vindicate a neo-Hegelian definition of political philosophy as the effort to influence public criticism by advertising an outlook more logically and thoroughly supported by a variety of cross-cultural textual evidence. (shrink)

Abstract:The central problems of political philosophy (e.g., legitimate authority, distributive justice) mirror the central problems of business ethics. The question naturally arises: should political theories be applied to problems in business ethics? If a version of egalitarianism is the correct theory of justice for states, for example, does it follow that it is the correct theory of justice for businesses? If states should be democratically governed by their citizens, should businesses be democratically managed by their employees? Most (...) theorists who have considered these questions, including John Rawls inPolitical Liberalism, and Robert Phillips and Joshua Margolis in a 1999 article, have said “no.” They claim that states and businesses are different kinds of entities, and hence require different theories of justice. I challenge this claim. While businesses differ from states, the difference is one of degree, not one of kind. Business ethics has much to learn from political philosophy. (shrink)

Foundations of Civic Engagement is a comprehensive survey and reassessment of the entire field of social and political philosophy. Suitable for use as a primary text for courses on political thought, this book explores the basic arguments of the most important historical and contemporary figures—including Ancient Greek, modern and contemporary theories of communitarianism, social contract, feminism, postmodernsim, Marxism, and theories of communicative actions—and offers a thematic critique and integration of these philosophies.

This article discusses the significance of historical research in normative political philosophy. Methodologically ahistoricist philosophers argue that historical research has limited relevance to political philosophy as it only serves to validate if a theory is sufficiently historically fact-sensitive. However, this perspective allows for minimal engagement with intellectual history. In contrast, I advocate for a more substantial role of historical research, suggesting that it not only provides evidence to refute political philosophical views but also serves as (...) a source of imaginative resources. I show that thinkers from across the humanities, like R.J. Collingwood, Quentin Skinner, Michel Foucault, Raymond Geuss, David Graeber, and Bernard Williams, have recognised the importance of these imaginative resources in shaping methodological reflections. These thinkers are concerned that limiting the relevance of history to normative theorising exposes ahistoricist thinkers to imaginative failures. I argue that this is best construed as a concern about the epistemic reliability of their evaluative judgments. Imaginative failures can introduce biases that unjustifiably restrict the range of solutions to practical collective problems they contemplate. Historical research serves a normative function that is unavailable to the methodologically ahistoricist approach by preventing such failures. (shrink)

'...a remarkable book....Zuckert shows, subtly and persuasively, how the themes of American literature resonate with those of modern thought...Zuckert brings us to the point where philosophy and politics intersect. Few projects have such depth.'-AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW.

Political philosophers often see their task in providing a justification of states, with 'justification' understood, in analogy to the theological use of the term, as an argument showing states to be right, or unobjectionable. Political philosophers disagree on what property of a state it is that is required for its being right. In fact, it is difficult to see what could give this or that property of a state its right-making power. Since there is nothing that states as (...) such are called upon to be or to do, claims to the effect that some property or other is right-making are unfounded. The task of justification falling away, then, political philosophers should rather ask what should be done now with states. (shrink)

Matter and Form explores the relationship between natural science and political philosophy from the classical to contemporary eras, taking an interdisciplinary approach to the philosophic understanding of the structure and process of the natural world and its impact on the history of political philosophy. It illuminates the importance of philosophic reflection on material nature to moral and political theorizing, mediating between the sciences and humanities and making a contribution to ending the isolation between them.

A critique of Rorty's own provocative political philosophy, as well as an in-depth look at both the issues concerning the relationship between the public and the private, and arguments on the role of reason in liberal political discourse generally.

This book sets out to re-examine the foundations of Thomas Hobbes’s political philosophy, and to develop a Hobbesian normative theory of international relations. Its central thesis is that two concepts – anarchy and authority – constitute the core of Hobbes's political philosophy whose aim is to justify the state. The Hobbesian state is a type of authority (juridical, public, coercive, and supreme) which emerges under conditions of anarchy ('state of nature'). A state-of-nature argument makes a difference (...) because it justifies authority without appeal to moral obligation. The book shows that the closest analogue of a Hobbesian authority in international relations is Kant's confederation of free states, where states enjoy 'anarchical' (equal) freedom. At present, this crucial form of freedom is being threatened by economic processes of globalisation, and by the resurgence of private authority across state borders. (shrink)

The aim of the Oxford Readings in Philosophy series is to bring together important recent writings in major areas of philosophical inquiry, selected from a variety of sources, mostly periodicals, which may not be conveniently available to the university student or the general reader. The editor of each volume contributes an introductory essay on the items chosen and on the questions with which they deal. A selective bibliography is appended as a guide to further reading.

이 글은 박인철의 「후설의 정치철학」을 주된 비판의 내용으로 삼아 후설의 현상학이 정치철학으로서 제시되기 어렵다고 주장한다. 이 주장은 박인철의 논문에 대한 다음의 세 가지 분석적 비평에 의해 뒷받침된다. 첫째, 그가 제시한 후설의 ‘본질주의 철학’과 ‘실천주체의 공동체적 자유’ 등은 후설 현상학의 정치철학적 성격을 보여주기에 충분하지 않다. 둘째, 후설이 제시한 ‘사랑의 공동체’는 종교철학이나 도덕철학 등도 추구하는 이상적 공동체로서 메타정치철학적이지 정치철학의 고유한 주제가 아니다. 셋째, 박인철이 제시하는 ‘폭넓은’ 권력 개념은 정치권력을 포함하기에 너무 느슨하고, 후설의 사랑 개념이 루소의 일반의지 개념과 유사하다고 주장되지만 전자는 후자와 같이 (...) 법에 의한 권력을 필요로 하지 않으며, 그리고 사랑의 공동체는 ‘사후적으로’, ‘폭넓은’ 의미의 권력을 창출할 뿐이다. 결론적으로 박인철의 설명에 따른 후설의 현상학은 정치철학의 고유한 주제인 국가의 지배와 관련된 문제를 다루지 않기 때문에 하나의 정치철학으로서 제시될 수 없다. (shrink)

The west-centrism in approaching the knowledge systems of east has been sufficiently highlighted and problematized. This paper argues that the attempts have often been restricted to a framework of colonial gaze that prevents the Indian classical philosophy from gaining a vantage of its own. The approach to the classical traditions have been largely fragmented, catering to the pressure of proving its “relevance” either as a knowledge system or as texts with useful resources and answers to contemporary problems. This “problem (...) solving” framework at the very outset de-recognizes the capacity of an entire philosophical tradition of problem identification and formulation, unsettling terrains of knowledge by asking new questions. The article presents a case for theorizing relevance as a prerequisite to resolving some of these issues. (shrink)

The Renaissance, known primarily for the art and literature that it produced, was also a period in which philosophical thought flourished. This two-volume anthology, which was originally published in 1997, contains forty translations of important works on moral and political philosophy written during the Renaissance and hitherto unavailable in English. The anthology is designed to be used in conjunction with The Cambridge History of Renaissance Philosophy, in which all of these texts are discussed. The works, originally written (...) in Latin, Italian, French, Spanish and Greek, cover such topics as: concepts of man, Aristotelian, Platonic, Stoic, and Epicurean ethics, scholastic political philosophy, theories of princely and republican government in Italy and northern European political thought. Each text is supplied with an introduction and a guide to further reading. (shrink)

This dissertation interprets and begins to assess critically the political philosophy of Alexandre Kojeve. Kojeve's political philosophy is perhaps the fullest expression of some of the central goals and aspirations of modernity, and a sustained examination of his thought allows one the opportunity to begin to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of modernity as such, of modern rationalism and historicism. This dissertation is unique in that it attempts to bring into focus Kojeve's political philosophy (...) by looking at his corpus as a whole, something which has only recently become possible given the fact that many of his most important works were published posthumously in the last 15 years. In analyzing Kojeve's political philosophy, I begin and take my bearings from the debate between Kojeve and Leo Strauss in the latter's On Tyranny. This is probably the single best contemporary debate which succinctly crystallizes the fundamental differences between the ancients and moderns or their respective understandings of the nature of philosophy and politics, and the relation between the two. In many ways, the dissertation is a modest attempt to respond to the objections that Strauss raised against Kojeve's position but which Kojeve himself never directly addressed. ;The first chapter of the dissertation discusses Kojeve's philosophy of history, and in particular his understanding of Hegel's master-slave dialectic. The second chapter examines the Esquisse d'une phenonmenologie du droit, where Kojeve most fully articulates the character of the justice of the universal and homogenous state, the state that is to be realized at the end of our historical evolution. Chapter three looks at Kojeve's understanding of the nature and purpose of political philosophy, and I pay particular attention to Kojeve's own motivations for writing the many works that he did. The fourth chapter discusses the character of Kojevean satisfaction, as well as what our economic and spiritual life is going to be like at the end of history. In the final section of chapter four, I briefly suggest that one further area of investigation would be to examine in more detail Kojeve's understanding of classical political philosophy. (shrink)

The gift of death and the new magic of politics: Hegel and Tolkien on sorcery and secondary worlds -- The political theology of catastrophe: Plato's Athenian Atlantis, Tolkien's Númenoran Atalantë, and the Nazi Reich -- Burglar and bourgeois? Bilbo Baggins' dialectical ethics -- Hobbes, Hobbits, and the modern state of Mordor: myths of power and desire in Leviathan and Tolkien's Legendarium -- Middle-earth and the return of the common good -- Epilogue: from apocalypse to eucatastrophe: "The end of history," (...) happy endings, and the politics of narrative form. (shrink)

The paper deals with the idea of cosmopolitanism in contemporary Anglo-American social and political philosophy. The aim of the paper is to introduce cosmopolitan theories as one of the components of the concept of global justice. Its basis is the clarification of the theoretical ground of cosmopolitanism. Attention is paid also to the problems of moral argumentation in contemporary Anglo-American social and political philosophy.

Tom Sorell modifies an interpretation he presented in his book, Hobbes (1986) . He continues to maintain that Hobbesian natural philosophy and Hobbesian civil philosophy are methodologically quite distinct, as well as distinct in subject-matter. But it is misleading to put this by saying that civil philosophy is normative and natural philosophy is explanatory, as if civil philosophy itself weren’t supposed to be explanatory. Civil philosophy can be explanatory in the sense of specifying normative (...) precepts for achieving a certain goal precepts that correspondingly explain the achievement of that goal. Explanatory civil science is still quite distinct from explanatory natural science, however, contrary to what is claimed by Sorell’s critics. (shrink)

The studies in this 1996 volume consider Hegel's mature views on ethics and politics and relate them to the classical tradition of Western political thought. Manfred Tiedel brings to the analysis of Hegel's views a high level of scholarship and a thorough knowledge of earlier thinkers. Concentrating on the Philosophy of Right, he reveals connections which clarify Hegel's understanding of his relationship with his predecessors and of the transformation of political philosophy which Hegel wanted to effect. (...) In doing so, he throws much needed light on the structure of Hegel's work and on many of its more obscure doctrines concerning natural law, political economy, civil society and the state. Professor Riedel's work is highly regarded in Germany. The translation of these essays will provide a valuable counterpart to the approach of most English-speaking scholars and will help significantly to extend the understanding and appreciation of Hegel's political philosophy. (shrink)

The notions of “ideal theory” and “nonideal theory” have become widely accepted in political philosophy. Recently, several philosophers’ have urged that ideal theory systematically produces practically irrelevant theories. Such philosophers argue that political philosophy ought move away from ideal theory in order to make the discipline more germane to the unjust real world. Call this tactic of eliminating ideal theory “Strategy.” In this paper, I argue that political philosophy would do well to abandon the (...) ideal/nonideal distinction. Though the use of INID is widespread, philosophers do not have one uniform way of drawing the distinction; of the several common ways of drawing the distinction, none is categorical. As a consequence of this ambiguity, the role that INID plays in our political philosophical theorizing has become pernicious. (shrink)

This book offers a sustained engagement with the political philosophy of Paul Ricoeur and demonstrates both the significance of the political in his own thinking throughout his career, and how his understanding of the political offers something valuable to current discussions of issues in political philosophy.

James Good (2006) has recently made a compelling case for the claim that Dewey held Hegel's philosophy to be consistent with his own up until 1904.1 It is crucial to Good's argument that Dewey's Hegel-interpretation from the early 1890s until around the turn of the century be distinguished from the British metaphysical Neo-Hegelianism defended by F. H. Bradley and T. H. Green. Good also argues more generally, however, that Dewey never made a clean break with Hegel despite Dewey's several (...) critical remarks on Hegel's philosophy in later works.2 My aim is to investigate the basis for this general claim and particularly with regard to Dewey's outline of a social and political philosophy after his first public .. (shrink)

This collection of essays evolved from a colloquium held at the University of British Columbia in 1995 to honour the eminent political scientist and aphorist W.J. Stankiewicz. A theorist and consultant on political decisions, Stankiewicz has been noted for his ability to bring the classical concepts of political science into the decision-making rooms of everyday political action. Among the distinguished Canadian and American contributors are Alan Cairns, Jean Bethke Elshtain, George Feaver, Barry Cooper, Anthony Parel, Arpad (...) Kadarkay and Ian Ross. The contributors have not only explored and extended the central ideas of Stankiew146;s political situations. The volume concludes with two of Professor Stankiewicz's hitherto unpublished essays (on natural law and ecology, and truth in politics). (shrink)

This article reconsiders Paul Ricœur’s political philosophical writings on the task of decolonization and European responsibility in light of a horizon of intercultural dialogue. Departing from the exchange between Ricœur and his former student Enrique Dussel, it discusses the Ricœurian critique of modernity. After giving some background on Ricœur’s reflections on decolonization, it will clarify what Ricœur calls the “crisis of the concrete universal in the thinking and in the historical experience of Western Europe,” and what role cultural difference (...) has in this crisis. Considering Ricœur’s explicitly European perspective, this will lead us to a critical discussion on the envisioned possibility of a world-historical subject. Finally, I will discuss the role of European self-reflection in relation to a horizon of intercultural dialogue and narration from a post-/decolonial perspective. (shrink)

"Under the editorship of Edward M. Sait." Bibliography at end of each chapter.

Modern barbarity will soon get rid of the human species unless a new form of violence is found able to compete with the state, without turning into a new form a state. This new form is authoritative, legitimate intimidation. But what are the conditions to speak out authoritatively? Are they not distinctive state conditions? Moreover, does authority lie in the form of discourse? If not, because consentment has superseded mere submission, which are the authoritative sources of discourse which, though neither (...) overtly nor primarily conflicting with the state, nor with corporations, could somehow not completely coincide with the interests of it and even work against it, though like it? This paper examines these questions. (shrink)

This book provides an overview of the works of the most influential German moral and political philosophers of the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, starting with Immanuel Kant's Groundwork for a Metaphysic of Morals, published in 1785, and ending with Nietzsche's Ecce Homo, published posthumously in 1908. Throughout this period, under the impact of the French Revolution and the transformation in political thinking which it effected, the German philosophers examined here confronted, in one way or another, the issue (...) of citizenship and the duties it entailed. (shrink)

Taking as their departure point the political-philosophical analyses of German scholar Tilo Schabert, the philosophical and empirical essays in this volume invite the reader to move beyond the sterile dichotomy of political activity as either pure will or as folded into a more manageable activity.

It is a safe prediction that, especially now with cultural contacts freely flowing between East and West in both directions, the Hungarian thinker Istvan Bibo will soon be given full accolade as one of the most outstanding political theorists of this century, in stature equal to the �greats� in the entire European tradition of political thought. Bibo's significance far exceeds local, parochial interests. While profoundly original and organically stemming from Hungarian culture, Bibo belongs also to the �West�. If (...) his political thought is to be epitomized in one succinct phrase, it is �the realism of moralism�, or the almost flawless synthesis of a deeply radical, morally infused vision and value-system with the hard-nosed, unsentimental realist-s insight into enduring problems of politics and society. This synthesis is �almost� flawless: in the closing section of this article I will advance a few constructively critical remarks concerning some questionable points in the trajectory of Bibo's thought. (shrink)

Alexis de Tocqueville asserted that America had no truly great literature, and that American writers merely mimicked the British and European traditions of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. This new edited collection masterfully refutes Tocqueville's monocultural myopia and reveals the distinctive role American poetry and prose have played in reflecting and passing judgment upon the core values of American democracy. The essays, profiling the work of Mark Twain, F. Scott Fitzgerald, John Updike, Edith Wharton, Walt Whitman, Henry James, Willa Cather, (...) Walker Percy, and Tom Wolfe, reveal how America's greatest writers have acted as society's most ardent cheerleaders and its most penetrating critics. Christine Dunn Henderson's exciting new work offers literature as a portal through which to view the philosophical principles that animate America's political order and the mores which either reinforce or undermine them. (shrink)

Collection of essays adapted from an undergraduate honors conference held at Binghamton University which address contemporary issues in political philosophy.