Pre-Liberal Political Philosophy

Political Philosophy: Theories, Thinkers, and Concepts is an important reference that provides the essentials needed for understanding how philosophies have shaped political systems, opinions, and behaviors.''Offering a collection of 100 articles and written by eminent scholars, Political Philosophy explains the timeless importance of ancient and modern political philosophers and philosophies that remain vital today.''Political Philosophy: Theories, Thinkers, and Concepts is organized into three sections:''''The first section has more than 40 articles on fundamental political philosophies, including Communism, Egalitarianism, Feminism, Pragmatism, and Rational Choice Theory.''Section Two, with over 20 articles, provides critical biographical information on the essential philosophers like Aristotle, Burke, Hobbes, Machiavelli, Rousseau, and Wollstonecraft.''More than 30 articles conclude the volume's exploration of philosophical concepts and issues. Important topics like bureaucracy, citizenship, justice, leadership, and popular sovereignty are explained.''''

Grzegorz Leopold Seidler, as author 217 publications, the mast important book is Przedmarksowska myśl polityczna (Premarxian Political Thought) with two editions. This book is based on his earlier books such as Myśl polityczna starozytności (Ancient Political Thought), Myśl polityczna średniowiecza (Middle Ages Political Thought) and Myśl polityczna czasow nowozytnych (Modern Times Political Thought). Mentioned above books are authors attempts both present methodology and the history of the political thought from its Eastern beginnings to the times of the influences Marxian political thought, mainly in socialist countries, including Poland. Przedmarksowska myśl polityczna summarise those attempts but with limited authors success. My research has analytical character, devoted to Przedmarksowska myśl polityczna in the light of the many commentators opinions and evaluations – positive and negative. Polish commentators of those book, in they majority, evaluate its as a great, original, complex presentation almost all fundamental issues of the discipline known as Historia doktryn politycznych (The History of the Political Thought), Historia doktryn politycznych i prawnych (The History of the Political and Juridical Thought) or Historia doktryn polityczno-prawnych (The History of the Politically-Juridical Thought). Commentators from abroad of Poland usually were much more critical. I contrast, from many different points of view, book Przedmarksowska myśl polityczna with my book Wspolczesne doktryny polityczne (Contemporary Political Thought).

Abnormal Justice

Reviewed by: Augustine's Political Thought ed. by Richard J. Dougherty Evan Dutmer Richard J. Dougherty, editor. Augustine's Political Thought. Rochester Studies in Medieval Political Thought 2. Rochester: University of Rochester Press, 2019. Pp. vi + 281. Cloth, $125.00. "Augustine's City of God is not a treatise of political or social philosophy." So begins Christian Tornau's section on political philosophy in his entry on Augustine for the Stanford [End Page 330] Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Evident in this remark is the ambivalence with which historians of philosophy have generally treated the political philosophy of the great late antique philosopher of northern Africa. Despite its suggestive title and its extended apologetical attacks on the Earthly City, the City of God is decidedly not a work of political philosophy in the traditional sense: it does not reason about the best form of government; it only rarely functions as a mirror for Christian princes; it recommends no real social or political reforms (e.g. the abolition of slavery); even the cities described have fluid, shifting citizenry of indefinite number (the Earthly City, for instance, turns out to be only loosely composed of earthly patriots—the denizens of the City of God walk in their midst). It is rather intensely protreptic, a proselytizing document that calls for the reader to leave the Earthly City (with its characteristic love, amor sui, viz. love of self) for the City of God (with its characteristic love, amor Dei, viz. the love of God). Augustine's Political Thought proceeds from different starting points. Inspired by Ernest Fortin, the contributors to this volume search for a political teaching in the work of Augustine that, at times, is implicit or indirect. The City of God, which casts doubts on the efficacy of political theory as a project worthy of Christian attention, thus could be seen as containing a latent pessimistic political teaching. Further, even works not generally considered to be political in the Augustinian corpus—e.g. the Confessions or the early Cassiciacum dialogues—become candidates for political interpretation (see Michael Foley's chapter on the early dialogues and Douglas Kries's on Augustine's Confessions and Plato's Republic). Inspired by Leo Strauss's esotericism hypothesis—that numerous philosophers in (especially) the Platonic tradition have used an esoteric style of writing—contributors to this volume examine Augustine's point of contact with "classical political philosophy" (see especially Thomas Harmon's "The Few, the Many, and the Universal Way of Salvation: Augustine's Point of Engagement with Platonic Political Thought"). In Peter Busch's "Peace in the Order of Nature: Augustine, Giles, and Dante," interest in the supposedly continuous tradition of classical political philosophy extends to an intriguing medieval debate between Giles of Rome and Dante on the temporal and ecclesial-spiritual powers of the Pope. Strauss's influence is evident in the only clearly explicated methodological commitment of the volume, contained in Dougherty's editorial introduction: "The contributions of this volume all take as a matter of utmost importance the task of understanding St. Augustine on his own terms" (1). Similarly: "The thrust of the essays is not simply putting Augustine into conversation with ancient or modern authors … but rather first coming to know with as much assurance as possible what Augustine thought. … To do so, one must honor Augustine's foundational work as much as one can, following the nuances of his argument and often recognizing the interplay between and among texts" (2). These comments follow Strauss in criticizing the perceived "historicism" of modern-day scholarship, encouraging, rather, close study of the "interplay" between texts in Augustine's corpus—and understanding "Augustine's own argument comprehensively" (2). The appeal of many essays in this volume will depend on how plausible one finds these background interpretive commitments. Some might be skeptical about attempts to "understand Augustine's own argument comprehensively" (2) through "honor[ing] Augustine's foundational work" (2), while others may doubt just how much of Augustine's political thought can be gleaned from works on topics other than political philosophy. Last, those disposed to view Augustine's thought along roughly developmental lines might find it curious to draw from much earlier works in Augustine's...

The Law of Peoples

O projeto de John Dewey sobre a filosofia social não tem sido considerado como uma peça importante de seu pensamento. Entretanto, seus textos sobre esse tópico constituem um notável esforço para articular diversos novos conceitos e ideias, os quais não podem ser encontrados em outra parte de sua extensa obra filosófica. Inserida nesse contexto, a nova edição de suas “Palestras em filosofia política e social” – série de palestras que Dewey apresentou quando esteve na China – fornece um material único para revisar seu ponto de vista social. Levando-se em consideração que o pragmatista introduz uma “figura normativa” e que ele identifica um conjunto de necessidades humanas básicas de maneira a compreender plenamente esse critério normativo. Como hipótese, considero (i) que a filosofia social está principalmente associada com juízos práticos e (ii) que é plausível interpretar essas necessidades humanas básicas como valores. Para sustentar essas afirmações, primeiro, reconstruo a proposta de Dewey sobre um terceiro tipo de pensamento social. Segundo, examino sua posição sobre valores e normas. Terceiro, analiso a “figura normativa” e considero a “leitura antropológica” apresentada por Roberto Frega (2015). Por fim, ofereço uma análise complementar, argumentando que é possível explicar o padrão normativo de Dewey de maneira coerente com respeito aos propósitos do seu pensamento social – e, além disso, que é possível evitar qualquer compromisso essencialista.

This paper discusses the concept of public value in relation to government ICT investment from three perspectives – theory foundations, assessment methods, and an application example. The discussion of theory foundations combines attention to the roots of the concept of public value in political philosophy and public administration. The origins of the concept of public value are discussed in terms of foundational ideas in political and moral philosophy about the nature of the good society: utilitarianism and the social contract. The concern with public value, or utility, in early Western moral and political philosophy is central to the two major schools of thought, utilitarian and social contractarian. The social order that produces the greatest good or utility for the greatest number is preferred in the utilitarian perspective. The contractarian view holds that a good society should be based on shared principles and arrangements that avoid the potential evils of unconstrained greed. Though these two views political and moral philosophy differ, they weave similar connections among the basic concept of value, individual interests, societal interests, and institutional forms. These concepts and connections are basic to the public value framework.

Because it articulates the existence of economic activities and agents in both society and the market, stakeholder theory is generally associated with a value-led approach to management, or, in other words, with business ethics. It is considered to have made a major contribution to corporate social responsibility. However, less interest has been taken in its contribution to social and political philosophy. This chapter examines how stakeholder theorists question contemporary political philosophy by focusing on its unresolved issues. In effect, questions such as the social contract, equality, and social justice are inherent to stakeholder theory. Consequently, the theory is applied beyond the sphere of its original management environment to question philosophical categories, while at the same time acknowledging the differences between one field and another. For stakeholder theory, the firm is the center; for political and social philosophy, the construction of public life, of the common good, of the art of living together has no center, and if one does in fact exist, it has nothing to do with economic life. This section examines the borders established between political, social and moral philosophy, on the one hand, and management science on the other; in it, an attempt is made to highlight the concept of “porosity” (Bonnafous-Boucher 2006).

Journal of Political PhilosophyVolume 18, Issue 4 p. 469-493 Kant's Sovereignty Dilemma: A Contemporary Analysis Katrin Flikschuh, Katrin Flikschuh Government, London School of Economics The article was written whilst I was in receipt of a Leverhulme Trust research grant to work on Kant's political philosophy. I gratefully acknowledge the Trust's generous support. Earlier versions of the article were presented at the Oxford conference on Global Justice (May 2008), as well as political theory and philosophy seminars at LSE, the University of Fribourg, the University of Stirling, and the University of Frankfurt. A very early version was given at the Perpetual Peace conference in Copenhagen (August 2005). My thanks to organizers and audiences of all these events. Many colleagues have read all or portions of successive drafts and have offered generous comments and advice throughout. My particular thanks to Sharon Byrd, Patrick Capps, Pavlos Eleftheriadis, Rainer Forst, Stefan Gosepath, Simon Hope, Joachim Hruschka, Kent Hurtig, Mogens Chrom Jacobsen, Bernd Ludwig, Pauline Kleingeld, Nico Krisch, Amanda Perreau-Saussine, Eiko Thielemann, Ines Valdes, Howard Williams, Lea Ypi, and Simone Zurbuchen. Finally, my thanks to the journal's two referees for their very helpful suggestions on how to improve the penultimate draft.Search for more papers by this author Katrin Flikschuh, Katrin Flikschuh Government, London School of Economics The article was written whilst I was in receipt of a Leverhulme Trust research grant to work on Kant's political philosophy. I gratefully acknowledge the Trust's generous support. Earlier versions of the article were presented at the Oxford conference on Global Justice (May 2008), as well as political theory and philosophy seminars at LSE, the University of Fribourg, the University of Stirling, and the University of Frankfurt. A very early version was given at the Perpetual Peace conference in Copenhagen (August 2005). My thanks to organizers and audiences of all these events. Many colleagues have read all or portions of successive drafts and have offered generous comments and advice throughout. My particular thanks to Sharon Byrd, Patrick Capps, Pavlos Eleftheriadis, Rainer Forst, Stefan Gosepath, Simon Hope, Joachim Hruschka, Kent Hurtig, Mogens Chrom Jacobsen, Bernd Ludwig, Pauline Kleingeld, Nico Krisch, Amanda Perreau-Saussine, Eiko Thielemann, Ines Valdes, Howard Williams, Lea Ypi, and Simone Zurbuchen. Finally, my thanks to the journal's two referees for their very helpful suggestions on how to improve the penultimate draft.Search for more papers by this author First published: 10 March 2010 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9760.2010.00361.xCitations: 39 Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Citing Literature Volume18, Issue4December 2010Pages 469-493 RelatedInformation

The papers by Keith Dowding and Adrian Walsh debate whether political philosophy belongs within political science or whether it belongs within philosophy. It is my contention that the two contributions largely agree about the descriptive level, but disagree at the prescriptive and potentially at the institutional level. I conclude with a brief argument in favour of a pluralist approach to the big questions in political philosophy. By ‘pluralist approach’, I mean that (i) political philosophers belong in both political science and philosophy departments and that (ii) the intellectual community of political philosophy would be better off if it included representatives and methods from both philosophy and political science.

I would not be surprised—indeed, I would be gratified—if some professor built a course in political philosophy around one, or several, of the books in the Nomos series, yearly collections since 1958 based on papers given at the annual meeting of the American Society for Political and Legal Philosophy. These collections deal with current topical themes in politics and political philosophy. The articles in the collections are reliably rigorous yet accessible, well crafted, learned, provocative, and well selected. Stephen Macedo and Yael Tamir's collection, Moral and Political Education is no different. I am not sure, however, how well this collection would fit, without substantial empirical supplementation, as the core for a course in political theory. Political theory differs, to my mind, from political philosophy by the amount of attention theorists give to the real world of politics. In this book, insufficient attention is given to political reality.

W. R. Lee, in his paper on Robert Baker published in a previous issue of this journal, has described Leeds, the home of both Baker and Charles Turner Thackrah, as 'the cradle of industrial medicine'.1 Leeds was doubtless unique in nurturing two such eminent practitioners of this branch of medicine, but many of the other expanding towns of the late 18th and early 19th centuries could claim to be the dwelling place of doctors keenly interested, if not in industrial medicine, at least in social medicine, in the application of their professional skills and know ledge to the problems of an industrializing and urbanizing society. Thus Manchester could boast Thomas Percival, John Ferriar, James Phillips Kay and Peter Gaskell; Liverpool, James Currie and William Duncan; Edinburgh, William Alison; and Sheffield, George Calvert Holland.2 In London the names were legion but included Southwood Smith, Neil Arnott, William Farr, Thomas Wakley, Edward Smith and John Simon prominent amongst them.3 Amongst smaller towns, Chester had its John Haygarth and Bristol its William Budd, and doubtless similar if less well known examples could be found in most urban communities of any size in this period.4 It is the object of this paper to assess the reasons for the growing interest and involvement of medical practitioners in the problems of social reform created by the first Industrial Revolution. One of the most important, vital and disturbing features of this process was the growth of the industrial town. Manchester, Leeds, Birmingham and their fellows symbolized in many ways the increasing power and wealth of the industrial and commercial middle class, presenting as they did a challenge to the long established social and political supremacy of the landed classes, the aristocracy, the squirearchy and the clergy of the Church of England. The architecture of the new towns, their factories and warehouses, chapels and town halls, and later their railway stations gave expression in concrete form to this increasing wealth, power and self-confidence. Weekly newspapers like the Man chester Guardian, the Leeds Mercury or the Bradford Observer voiced the opinions and demands of the urban middle classes. Literary and Philosophical Societies, Statistical Societies and Chambers of Commerce were formed to promote discussion of problems and to form opinion on them. In these aspects of urban development, the medical profession played a prominent role. In Leeds, it was a paper on 'Town Halls', read to the Leeds Philosophical and Literary Society by the secretary of the Leeds Improvement Society, Dr. J. D. Heaton, which launched the campaign to build a new town hall in Leeds, a development which Asa Briggs has des cribed as a 'case study in Victorian civic pride'.5 Robert Baker was a member of Leeds Town Council in the 1830s, and G. C. Holland an alderman of Sheffield in his later years.6 'Lit. and Phil.' and Statistical Societies were frequently dominated by professional men, with doctors well to the fore. Holland, a member of Sheffield Literary and Philosophic Society, remarked that of its 86 proprietors, subscribing two guineas per annum each, only 19 were commercial men, 'the remainder being generally professional gentle men or persons in easy circumstances'.7 C. T. Thackrah became the first secretary of the Leeds Philosophical and Literary Society after its formation in 1819.8 In Manchester, Thomas Percival and John Ferriar played an important part in the debates of the Literary and Philosophical Society in the 1790s, whilst some 40 years later James Kay was one of the founder members of the Manchester Statistical Society.9 In Liverpool, James Currie helped to revive the Literary Society and became its president.10 Yet, despite their prominent role in the activities of the new industrial towns, many doctors did not subscribe unreservedly to the creed of economic, religious and political freedom which some of their 22

Perhaps no Victorian was more startled by the implications of evolution than Charles Darwin (1809–82). Transformations of nature through natural selection were considered in his private and, eventually, very public writings; but even as they flowed from his pen, these ideas disturbed him. He was perennially torn about their moral and ethical consequences. The imagery of struggle, selection and extinction in nature that Darwin did so much to fashion was also ready-made to describe the rough passage of arguments and beliefs through history, including the struggle for survival of the evolutionary idea itself. Darwin and his followers identified themselves with a cause, but they were not always so sanguine about the social and political repercussions of their intellectual battles. This chapter situates Darwin's struggle – and his concept of struggle – in a wider context of nineteenth-century evolutionary thought and explores political and religious consequences of the claim that species (human included) are not definitively fixed in form, but undergo change over time.

AS I LOOKED AT MY READING NOTES IN ORDER TO RETRACE the evolution of my thought on politics in general, and political thought in particular, over the last two decades or so, I found that my present concern with the reality of modern political thought could be progressively detected in those notes as from 1964. The rest and the bulk of the notes converge in three main themes: my first books on comparative communist politics, my interest in the development of the modern science of politics, and the incessant (pace Tocqueville) reflections on how to reconcile, in logic and in ethics, the variances between the quest for social justice and of that for political freedom in an advanced industrial society. But the post-1964 notes show now, more than I remembered, my early uneasiness about two, albeit different, orientations of modern political thought, or at least of its most popular schools. From one point of view, I felt that we were increasingly estranging ourselves from the existential reality of man. From another, I feared that our present methods of political analysis blur, rather than focus on, the distinctiveness of the politics of the modern industrial society. These notes, even trimmed and edited, inevitably form an amalgam of impressions, jotted down in a kind of intellectual shorthand, and insufficiently expounded. But as our contributions to this special issue are in the nature of a backward glance, I submit them as they are.

This major work of academic reference provides the first comprehensive survey of political thought in Europe, North America and Asia in the century following the French Revolution. Written by a distinguished team of international scholars, this Cambridge History is the latest in a sequence of volumes firmly established as the principal reference source for the history of political thought. In a series of scholarly but accessible essays, every major theme in nineteenth-century political thought is covered, including political economy, religion, democratic radicalism, nationalism, socialism and feminism. The volume also includes studies of major figures, including Hegel, Mill, Bentham and Marx, and biographical notes on every significant thinker in the period. Of interest to students and scholars of politics and history at all levels, this volume explores seismic changes in the languages and expectations of politics accompanying political revolution, industrialisation and imperial expansion and less-noted continuities in political and social thinking.