Force and Freedom: Can They Co-exist?

2011 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 387-402
Author(s):  
Talia Fisher
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Moral Philosophy ◽  
Political Power ◽  
Academic Discourse ◽  
Legal Philosophy ◽  
Legal Writing ◽  
Complicated Nature

Force and Freedom, a new book by Professor Arthur Ripstein, offers a comprehensive and highly sophisticated articulation of Kant’s legal and political philosophy. While Kant’s thinking on metaphysics and ethics has received paramount attention in the academic discourse, his contribution to legal and political theory has been somewhat marginalized. One reason for Kant’s exclusion from the central canon of political and legal philosophy is the abstract and very complicated nature of Kantian writing on law and political power, most particularly in the Doctrine of Right. Another reason is the difficulties many writers have encountered in their attempts to reconcile Kant’s political and legal writing with his moral philosophy. Against this background, the novelty and importance of Force and Freedom cannot be overstated.

Montaigne in America: The Political Theory of Judith Shklar

1995 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 167-199
Author(s):  
Mark Hulliung
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Legal Philosophy ◽  
The Political ◽  
The World ◽  
Judith Shklar

For three decades Judith Shklar (1928-1992) was one of the dominant figures in the world of political theory. Not many minds can feel their way into romanticism and then coolly turn round to examine legal philosophy, its very opposite, but she did so with exceptional success. After diagnosing the decline of political philosophy, she surprised many onlookers by making herself a major force behind its revitalization. Writing on Montaigne, Montesquieu, Rousseau, and Hegel, she both offered striking historical interpretations of their meaning and demonstrated how their outlooks could be lifted from their original contexts and pressed into service by the living.

Sprawiedliwość umowy społecznej

Etyka ◽  
1981 ◽  
Vol 19 ◽  
pp. 83-97
Author(s):  
Jacek Hołówka
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
Conceptual Framework ◽  
20Th Century ◽  
Moral Philosophy ◽  
John Rawls ◽  
Legal Philosophy ◽  
Theory Of Justice ◽  
Principles Of Justice

It is a belief of the author that A Theory of Justice by John Rawls is one of the most fundamental works in moral philosophy written in the 20th century. The principal merit of the book is found in a conceptual framework for a systematic discussion of the issues arising in moral philosophy, political philosophy, and legal philosophy. These discussions lead to the formulation of interrelated criteria of rightness for jurisdiction, legislation, constitutional provisions, uncodified practices and behaviour of individuals. However, the criteria offered by Rawls appear defective in certain conditions. They cannot fully support the principles of liberty and the principles of justice, nor the particular enactments contained in the just constitution.

The Biblical Politics of John Locke

2005 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 513-514
Author(s):  
Eldon J. Eisenach
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
John Locke ◽  
Political Power ◽  
Original Sin ◽  
Philosophical Argument ◽  
Creation Story ◽  
The Creation

The Biblical Politics of John Locke, Kim Ian Parker, Editions SR, Volume 29; Waterloo, Ontario: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 2004, pp. ix, 211.Parker's study is on the foundational role played by the creation story of Genesis in Locke's moral and political philosophy. Locke's First Treatise against patriarchalism was not only a refutation of Filmer's reading of Adam and original sin, it was a positive rereading of that story suggesting “an emancipation of humanity almost unprecedented in theological writings” (38). Locke's distinction between paternal and political power, then, is not merely a way of “scoring polemical points against Filmer” but becomes a way “to form the basis of his political theory” (120). What can too easily be read as “merely” exegetical polemic in the First Treatise is translated into philosophical argument in the Second Treatise.

From Crusades to Colonization: Violence in Secular and Religious Political Theory

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 1-21
Author(s):  
Xavier Scott
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
Modern Philosophy ◽  
Early Modern ◽  
International Law ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
John Rawls ◽  
State Power ◽  
Charles Taylor ◽  
Medieval Period ◽  
Beliefs And Values

This paper examines the transition in political philosophy between the medieval and early-modern periods by focusing on the emergence of sovereignty doctrine. Scholars such as Charles Taylor and John Rawls have focused on the ability of modern-states to overcome conflicts between different religious confessionals. In contrast, this paper seeks to examine some of the peace-promoting features of Latin-Christendom and some of the conflict-promoting features of modern-secular states. The Christian universalism of the medieval period is contrasted with the colonial ventures promoted by the Peace of Westphalia. This paper’s goal is not to argue that secularism is in fact more violent than religion. Rather, it seeks to demonstrate the major role that religion played in early modern philosophy and the development of sovereignty doctrine. It argues against the view that the modern, secular state is capable of neutrality vis-à-vis religion, and also combats the view that the secular nature of modern international law means that it is neutral to the different beliefs and values of the world’s peoples. These observations emphasize the ways in which state power and legitimacy are at the heart of the secular turn in political philosophy. 

Between Specters of War and Visions of Peace

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerald M. Mara
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Democratic Theory ◽  
First Century ◽  
Political Life ◽  
Frames Of Reference ◽  
War And Peace ◽  
History Of ◽  
Western Democracies

This book examines how ideas of war and peace have functioned as organizing frames of reference within the history of political theory. It interprets ten widely read figures in that history within five thematically focused chapters that pair (in order) Schmitt and Derrida, Aquinas and Machiavelli, Hobbes and Kant, Hegel and Nietzsche, and Thucydides and Plato. The book’s substantive argument is that attempts to establish either war or peace as dominant intellectual perspectives obscure too much of political life. The book argues for a style of political theory committed more to questioning than to closure. It challenges two powerful currents in contemporary political philosophy: the verdict that premodern or metaphysical texts cannot speak to modern and postmodern societies, and the insistence that all forms of political theory be some form of democratic theory. What is offered instead is a nontraditional defense of the tradition and a democratic justification for moving beyond democratic theory. Though the book avoids any attempt to show the immediate relevance of these interpretations to current politics, its impetus stems very much from the current political circumstances. Since the beginning of the twenty-first century , a series of wars has eroded confidence in the progressively peaceful character of international relations; citizens of the Western democracies are being warned repeatedly about the threats posed within a dangerous world. In this turbulent context, democratic citizens must think more critically about the actions their governments undertake. The texts interpreted here are valuable resources for such critical thinking.

Politics and Kingship in the Historical Books, with Attention to the Role of Political Theory in Interpretation

2020 ◽  
pp. 186-200
Author(s):  
Geoffrey Parsons Miller
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Distributive Justice ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Hebrew Bible ◽  
Historical Narratives ◽  
Political Organizations ◽  
Abstract Ideas ◽  
Theological Message

This chapter explores the thesis that the historical narratives of the Hebrew Bible address abstract ideas about politics, government, and law. Taking issue with critics who view the Bible’s spiritual and theological message as incommensurable with political philosophy, the chapter argues that the stories of politics and kingship in the Hebrew Bible’s historical books set forth set forth an impressive political theory that rivals, in some respects, the work of Plato, Aristotle, and other Greek thinkers. The key is to bring out the general ideas behind the specific narrative elements. The chapter illustrates this thesis by examining the Hebrew Bible’s treatment of a number of classic problems of political theory: anarchy, obligation and sovereignty, distributive justice, and the comparative analysis of political organizations.

Toward a Tradition of Ghanaian Political Philosophy

2019 ◽  
pp. 124-145
Author(s):  
Martin Odei Ajei
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
Political Power ◽  
African Philosophy ◽  
Philosophical Discourse ◽  
Kwame Nkrumah ◽  
Relative Status ◽  
Convergence And Divergence

This chapter discusses the contributions of Kwame Nkrumah, Kwasi Wiredu, William. E. Abraham, and Kwame Gyekye to the corpus of African philosophy. It elaborates their normative perspectives on three themes: the relevance of tradition to modernity, the appropriate form of democracy as means of legitimating political power in Africa, and the relative status of person and community; it also reflects on the significance of these themes in postcolonial African social and political philosophical discourse. The chapter then points out points of convergence and divergence among these individuals and how they relate with Western philosophical perspectives and argues that their work configures a coherent discourse that justifies joining them in a tradition of Ghanaian political philosophy.

scholarly journals The Concept of Feasibility: A Multivocal Account

Res Publica ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Guillery
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Moral Theory ◽  
Common View ◽  
The World ◽  
Common Objection ◽  
The Common

AbstractA common objection to a proposal or theory in political philosophy is that it is not feasible to realise what it calls for. This is commonly taken to be sufficient to reject a proposal or theory: feasibility, on this common view, operates as a straightforward constraint on moral and political theory, whatever is not feasible is simply ruled out. This paper seeks to understand what we mean when we say that some proposal or outcome is or is not feasible. It will argue that no single binary definition can be given. Rather, there is a whole range of possible specifications of the term ‘feasible’, each of which selects a range of facts of the world to hold fixed. No single one of these possible specifications, though, is obviously privileged as giving the appropriate understanding of ‘feasibility’ tout court. The upshot of my account of feasibility, then, will be that the common view of feasibility as a straightforward constraint cannot be maintained: in order to reject a moral theory, it will not be sufficient simply to say that it is not feasible.

Kierkegaard's Socratic Alternative to Hegel in Fear and Trembling

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-23
Author(s):  
Matthew Dinan
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Political Thought ◽  
Fear And Trembling

Abstract Søren Kierkegaard's Fear and Trembling has traditionally attracted interest from scholars of political theory for its apparent hostility to political philosophy, and more recently for its compatibility with Marxism. This paper argues for a reconsideration of Kierkegaard's potential contributions to political theory by suggesting that the work's shortcomings belong to its pseudonymous author, Johannes de Silentio, and are in fact intended by Kierkegaard. Attentiveness to the literary development of the pseudonym allows us to see a Kierkegaard who is a deeper and more direct critic of Hegel's political philosophy than is usually presumed. By creating a pseudonym whose argument ultimately fails, Kierkegaard employs Socratic irony in order to point readers to the need to recover Socratic political philosophy as the appropriate adjunct to the faith of Abraham, and as an alternative to Hegelian, and post-Hegelian, political thought.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document