The Crisis of Democratic Theory: Scientific Naturalism and the Problem of Value

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.

Download Full-text

Following Leaders

10.1093/oso/9780198823452.003.0011 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Robert E. Goodin ◽

Kai Spiekermann

Keyword(s):

Democratic Theory ◽

Opinion Leaders ◽

Independence Assumption ◽

Positive Correlation ◽

The Third ◽

Single Opinion

The question of leadership is connected to many central debates in democratic theory. In this chapter, the focus is on leadership in terms of beliefs, not desires. Opinion leaders’ influence undermines the Independence Assumption. The first section looks at single opinion leaders, who, if their influence is strong and their competence limited, reduce group competence, often severely. The second section considers multiple correlated opinion leaders. The effects depend on the negative or positive correlation between the opinion leaders, the number of voters following each, and the competence of leaders. Multiple uncorrelated opinion leaders are the topic of the third section. Their influence can be relatively benign if they are many and if they are reasonably competent. Finally, a great many ‘local’ opinion leaders, as envisaged by Lazarsfeld, Berelson, and Gaudet, can offset the negative epistemic impact of a few ‘big’ opinion leaders.

Download Full-text