PE 425: CONTEMPORARY POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY
|
|
|
This course is not intended as
an "ism's" course, although various ism's will
inevitably be part of the discussions and orientations to ideas, but is directed
at major theoretical statements concerning some of the most important questions
in political philosophy. The goal is not to come up with the "correct
interpretation" of any particular philosopher, given the controversy surrounding
each of them, but to come to the best understanding we can of the ideas
presented and, most importantly, how they fit with, and perhaps change, our
ideas. It is a course for self-affirmation and self-discovery as much
as understanding the thoughts of others.
The structure of the course emphasizes some depth into areas of thought rather than a brief look at numerous areas in a broad survey of all the ism's and ideas in the realm of contemporary thought. A major part of the readings will focus on John Rawl's ideas on political liberalism and justice. Rawls is considered to be one of the most, if not the most, significant political philosophers of the 20th century, even by many of his opponents. His Theory of Justice and Political Liberalism (which includes many of the ideas from Theory of Justice) are two of the most read and discussed books in political philosophy. Robert Nozick presents one of the most read statements of libertarian liberalism, which is a strong counterpoint to Rawl's version of liberalism and contains many ideas that relate to much of what today is called neoliberalism and perhaps some of what is called neo-conservatism, although significantly different in some aspects. The contemporary label of "conservative" referring to small government relates here also. Ideas of entitlements, limited government and individual rights are carefully delineated and argued by Nozick. Michael Sandel weaves together arguments concerning both Rawls' and Nozick's ideas as he represents a communitarian approach to political philosophy (although he questions this label somewhat). Communitarianism comes in several forms, but what is critical is the role envisioned for society and the place of the individual in society. In fact, the effect of society in developing the individual is a key part of the debate. Yael Tamir presents a unique view of nationalism since it comes from a liberal perspective. Given the debates over globalization, multilateralism and unilateralism, national identity and its sometimes negative effects on other peoples, Tamir's discussion is both thought-provoking and quite relevant to the contemporary developments of states and international institutions.
(1) This is a seminar. This means that professors generally don't lecture. We, students and professor, become a community of scholars seeking to understand and discuss the readings in the course. I may from time to time provide some lectures but try to avoid even launching out on long, thinly disguised lectures. I will, of course, play the role of offering some clarification and questioning from time to time, but the dynamics of the course will be group dynamics. No one person either understands all or can explain all that is written, thus the many symposia and articles arguing for and against various interpretations. The task is for us to arrive at "reasoned" understandings of the readings and also to ask how they fit with our own thoughts. The close reading and careful discussion of texts is directed towards developing the ability to think through questions on our own and refining responses to these questions.
(2) No exam except the final exam. The emphasis in the course is on participation orally and in written work. The emphasis is on daily study and learning and not on exams except for the final exam which will be 20% of the course grade. The daily work will be 60% and the term paper 20%.
This means, of course, that it is essential that students come to class prepared to discuss the material. Space out your reading and don't try to read all at once.. The expectation is that you will read carefully and perhaps reread key sections prior to class in preparation for the seminar. Passages in the readings should be marked and isolated for class questions and discussion.
To facilitate this process you will be expected to bring with you:
(a) each Tuesday a brief (2 page) summary of key ideas and questions
These should be typed and contain 4 key ideas with about a half page of explanation/comment/questioning on each idea. YOU NEED NOT write more than this for a good grade. It's not how much you write but what you write on and the comments you make and questions you raise or, if simply explaining the idea, the thoughtfulness of the explanation (even if not a common interpretation of the idea, it is considered a worthy commentary if thoughtfully put together. )
You should organize your Tuesday notes in the following manner:
1. (a) page number (of the idea to be discussed) then (b) the idea or comment in the text and then (c) your commentary on it either illuminating the basic meaning and or argument and/or raising critical question (s) about it.
2. The ideas should not all come from the first, last or middle pages of the text but from different parts of the reading for the day. We will discuss the entire reading and it will not help the discussion if everyone is writing on the first 5 -8 pages only. You will be asked to comment in class on an idea you have written about located in the first several pages or middle pages or ending pages; hence you will not be able to participate if you have only read and commented on the first few pages. It is expected you will have read the entire assignment and be able to discuss intellectually something from each of these sections.
(b) each Thursday a list (approx. one page) of at least 5 significant passages, terms, ideas in the reading that you think we should discuss.
You need not write these out extensively but simply refer to the topic and page, e.g., "the conception of self" expressed by Rawls at page x" or "the term "reflective equilibrium" at p. x", etc.. You should have thought about these passages, terms, ideas and be prepared to comment on them, explain the difficulty of understanding them , or whatever the case might be. [The differing requirements between the writing on Tues. and that on Thursday take into account the fact that you have more time between the Thurs. class and the Tues. class than between the Tues. class and the Thurs. class, hence more time to prepare and write for Tues. than for Thurs.] . It is more likely that on Thursday I will spend more time clarifying ideas from Tuesday's discussions and the readings for the week, but we still want to maintain the seminar, group study format as much as possible.
(3) The paper for the course is not a research paper but a paper that sets forth your agreements and disagreements with key ideas discussed in the course along with your indication of what seems to you to be the best approach to understanding justice in the political society so that you can make reasoned value decisions concerning political policies such as civil liberties, health care, taxation, poverty programs, etc. You need not discuss any of these policies specifically but should focus on what is the philosophical foundation from which you will approach these ideas and why. The coherence of your argument is especially important.---Length: about 10 pages double-spaced [5 single-spaced -- save a tree], normal margins and font size. You will be given the opportunity to re-work your paper for grade enhancement if necessary and desired provided you have made a good faith effort on the original paper and have been meeting your daily assignments in a regular and timely fashion.
(4) Our class discussions will periodically focus on how one would approach the following contemporary questions using the ideas presently under discussion [ thus, applied political philosophy] We will discuss some of these as they come up at relevant points in our discussions of the philosophers' ideas but will also dedicate a day for discussion of some of these to be sure we have a chance to explore how some of these ideas would relate to contemporary questions. :
1. What is the proper role of the state in providing a social safety net for individuals [in particular health care and some forms of income maintenance such as unemployment insurance, financial assistance for those living in poverty, social security pensions]
2. Gay rights
3. Abortion and the law
4. Affirmative action
5. Progressive taxation [i.e., tax those with more income more than those with less]
REQUIRED
Books and Articles
for the Course:
Rawls, John. Justice as
Fairness: A Restatement. 2001.
Nozick, Robert. Anarchy, State, and Utopia. 1974.
Sandel, Michael. Liberalism and the
Limits of Justice. 2nd. ed. 1998.
Tamir, Yael. Liberal Nationalism.1993.
I have developed a dictionary of terms from materials used in this course along with some other terms. This is neither a published, nor polished literary product but a set of notes for quick reference to numerous terms used in political thinking. It essentially seeks to help understand terms used frequently by an individual or by several authors or in general writings on political philosophy. Thus a term like "liberalism" has numerous quotes from various writers and their perceptions of this term. Likewise one finds several types of references to the term "person." The Dictionary also includes links to larger online dictionaries of terms used in philosophy. To access my dictionary of terms please click here.
|
Aug. 23 |
Introduction How to approach the study of political philosophy? We all do it, but how? Study "the masters" but the end goal is our personal decision-making. |
|
|
Aug. 28 |
Rawls: Liberalism We will leap right into the beginning of his theoretical argument. A lengthy outline of his basic ideas is located on pp. 1-38. However, to read this initially may be daunting since each of the terms needs a careful elaboration -- which he provides throughout the text. You are free to read through the section as optional reading; but, it will probably be more helpful as a good summary/outline after you have become acquainted with his basic ideas in some detail.
|
Rawls, 39-66 I find the diagram on pp. 62-63 and the discussion on it more confusing than helpful. Read through it but don't worry if it is not crystal clear. I think his verbal explanation of his thought is better than this graphic illustration. |
|
Aug. 30 |
Rawls
|
Rawls, 66-89 |
|
Sept. 4 |
Rawls
|
Rawls, 90-110 As in the diagram on pp. 62-63, the diagram on pp. 108-109 may be more confusing than helpful. Seek to understand it, but focus on his verbal description of his idea, which, I think, is a clearer presentation. |
|
Sept. 6 |
Rawls
|
Rawls, 111-134 |
|
Sept. 11 |
Rawls
|
Rawls, 135-158 |
|
Sept. 13 |
Rawls
|
Rawls, 158-179 |
|
Sept. 18 |
Rawls
|
Rawls, 180-202 |
|
Sept. 20 |
Nozick: Libertarianism -- a Variety of Liberalism related to Neoliberalism and Modern Conservatism
|
Nozick, 3-25 |
|
Sept. 25 |
Nozick: Libertarianism --- this is a form of liberalism which provides much of the basis for aspects of contemporary conservatism and neoliberalism. Here the individual is emphasized. In traditional conservatism and some forms of contemporary conservatism the community is emphasized rather than the individual. This we will see in the communitarianism and neo-Aristotelianism of Sandel below.
|
Nozick, 26-35; 48-53; 88-95 |
|
Sept. 27 |
Nozick:
|
Nozick, 96-119; 137-142 |
|
Oct. 2 |
Nozick:
|
Nozick, 149-174 |
|
Oct. 4 |
Nozick:
|
Nozick, 174-204 |
|
Oct. 9 |
Nozick:
|
Nozick, 204-231; 232-238;274-275 |
|
Oct. 11 |
Fall Break |
|
|
Oct. 16
|
Sandel: Communitarianism -- of a sort. Sandel presents the challenge to the individualism of liberalism in his arguments for the role of social moral values in political theories and political debates. He hesitates to use the term communitarian, as we will discuss, and seems more content with being labeled neo-Aristotelian. The labels are not as significant as understanding that his emphasis is on the community in comparison to the welfare liberalism of Rawls and the libertarian liberalism of Nozick. The degree of emphasis on the individual compared to the community and the interaction of the two is at the heart of much of political philosophy as one tries to define the appropriate role of the governing forces [community] with regard to the lives of the individuals within the political order. Questions as to source of political values and which values are predominant in policy matters, that is the use of government ruling power are intricately tied to the philosophical thought concerning the individual-community relationship.
|
Sandel, ix-xvi; 1-14 |
|
Oct. 18 |
Sandel:
|
Sandel, 47-65 |
|
Oct. 23 |
Sandel:
|
Sandel, 66-81 |
|
Oct. 25 |
Sandel:
|
Sandel, 82-103 |
|
Oct. 30 |
Sandel:
|
Sandel, 122-132; 147-164 |
|
Nov. 1 |
Sandel:
|
Sandel, 165-184; |
|
Nov. 6 |
Sandel:
|
Sandel, , 184-219; Sandel, "Search for a Public Philosophy"
|
|
Nov. 8 |
Tamir: Liberal Nationalism might sound like an oxymoron to some persons who have always separated liberal thinking and national identity emphases; thus Tamir has written this book to argue for a meeting ground between the two streams of thought. | Tamir, 3-34 |
|
Nov. 13 |
Tamir | Tamir, 78-116 |
|
Nov. 15 |
Tamir |
Tamir, 117-139 |
|
Nov. 20 |
Presentation of some of the ideas from your papers in class. |
Papers on personal political philosophy due. |
|
Nov. 27 |
Tamir | Tamir, 140-167 |
|
Nov. 29 |
Contemporary Issues: How do the ideas of Rawls, Nozick, and
Sandel deal with some of the contemporary issues? Abortion Euthanasia Gay rights Affirmative Action Progressive Income tax |
|
|
Dec. 4 |
Review Papers re-worked for improvement and grade enhancement due at this time.
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
Participation in class discussions/daily writings ----------
60%
No Mid-term Exam ------------------------
Final
Exam---------------------------------20%
Personal Political Philosophy
Paper---------20%