Abstract
Most of the official obituaries which followed the death of Michael Oakeshott were so inadequate, paid so little attention to what really mattered to him, that one can only hope that something better can be achieved.1 If one believed the New York Times (20 December 1990) he was a “right-wing guru,” a high-Tory oracle centrally concerned with interpreting (and usually decrying) current political events; if one did fractionally better and gave credence to the London Times he was, though a philosopher who “stood fastidiously aside” from politics, nonetheless the “articulator” of “the real philosophical foundations of Mrs. Thatcher's policies” (22 December 1991).
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
