This history of political theory is written in the light of the hypothesis that theories of politics are themselves a part of politics. In other words, they do not refer to an external reality but are produced as a normal part of the social milieu in which politics itself has its being. The reflection upon the ends of political action, upon the means of achieving them, upon the possibilities and necessities of political situations, and upon the obligations that political purposes impose, is an intrinsic element of the whole political process. Such thought evolves along with the institutions, the agencies of government, the moral and physical stresses to which it refers and which - one likes at least to believe - it, in some degree, controls.
Three Traditions of Greek Political Thought: Plato in Dialogue is an analysis of the emergence of Western philosophical and political thought in archaic and classical Greece. With particular focus on Plato, this book is an in-depth study of the contentious dialogue in classical political philosophy. In the late archaic and classical periods, two major traditions of philosophical and political thought developed. One tradition was associated with the Presocratic mechanistic materialistic philosophers and the Sophists. The second tradition, beginning with Pythagoras, gained full expression in the collected dialogues of Plato. Both of these philosophic traditions challenged the long established Greek mythico/religious tradition associated with Homer, Hesiod, Aeschylus, Sophocles, and others. This study examines the dynamic dialogue involving these three traditions, which present competing and conflicting world views. It concludes that Plato's dialogues, taken together, quintessentially embody the mainstream dialogue or trialogue, as it could be called, in Greek political thought. This book also makes the case that the three major traditions of Greek political thought set the stage for the future dialogue of Western political philosophy even to this day.
The purpose of this study is to determine Aristotle's attitude toward the content and method of Plato's natural science. Plato and Aristotle have often been regarded as on opposite sides of a philosophic 'Great Divide'. On the other hand, those who have found that the two men were in agreement have sometimes mentioned only scattered instances of that agreement. There is need for a new comparison of the two philosopher- one which is limited in scope, based on the primary texts, and which is systematic and thorough in method. If successful, such a comparison would bring into sharp focus one phase of Aristotle's comments on Plato. Our attempt to meet this need is Aristotle's Criticism of Plato's TIMAEUS. In pursuing this study, it has been necessary to reject a number of uncritically-accepted interpre tations of the Timaeus. Contrary to the view of many, we have concluded that Aristotle largely agreed with Plato, both in the principles and presuppositions of his natural science. A number of implications stem from this study. There is, for example, the oft-questioned manner in which Aristotle treated Plato's philosophy. In the great majority of instances, Aristotle stands forth as a reliable reporter and a skilled critic. Moreover, the study sheds light on that ancient riddle: whether Plato and Aristotle are basically akin or at odds in their general philosophies.
Examining its relation to ancient and Renaissance political thought, George M. Logan sees Thomas More's Utopia whole, in all its ironic complexity. He finds that the book is not primarily a prescriptive work that restates the ideals of Christian humanism or warns against radical idealism, but an exploration of a particular method of political study and the implications of that method for normative theory. Originally published in 1983. The Princeton Legacy Library uses the latest print-on-demand technology to again make available previously out-of-print books from the distinguished backlist of Princeton University Press. These editions preserve the original texts of these important books while presenting them in durable paperback and hardcover editions. The goal of the Princeton Legacy Library is to vastly increase access to the rich scholarly heritage found in the thousands of books published by Princeton University Press since its founding in 1905.
This title is part of UC Press's Voices Revived program, which commemorates University of California Press’s mission to seek out and cultivate the brightest minds and give them voice, reach, and impact. Drawing on a backlist dating to 1893, Voices Revived makes high-quality, peer-reviewed scholarship accessible once again using print-on-demand technology. This title was originally published in 1959.
This book offers a distinctive moral defense of capitalism. Unlike most such defenses, this book avoids the summoning of concepts and ideas drawn from the modern philosophical tradition that arose out of the 17th–18th century Enlightenment. It rejects the idea of supporting capitalism on the grounds of self-ownership, human dignity, property rights, social utility, or a social contract. Confidence in the power of human reason to demonstrate any of these notions has waned since the Enlightenment, and justifiably so. Capitalism stands in desperate need of different philosophic foundations. This book’s thesis is that capitalism can be more sturdily defended on a pre-modern basis. Adopting the ancient Roman philosopher Cicero as a guide, this book acknowledges the limits of human reason. It applies the ancient skepticism that Cicero represents, a school of thought that teaches us to be content with probabilities and to focus upon the practical dimensions of human existence. Philosophical inquiry is best directed to the task of identifying the means of securing both life and the good life for human beings. As such, this book stresses the overriding importance of maintaining social co-operation and advancing human excellence. It argues that capitalism satisfies both these imperatives.
Thank you for visiting our website. Would you like to provide feedback on how we could improve your experience?
This site does not use any third party cookies with one exception — it uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and to analyze traffic.Learn More.