source: AN INVITATION TO POLITICAL THOUGHT

K.L. Deutsch - J.R. Fornieri. Thompson Wadsworth 2009.

INTRODUCTION TO AN INVITATION
TO POLITICAL THOUGHT

By Kenneth L. Deutsch

WHAT IS POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY?

Ambrose Bierce in his humorous Devil’s Dictionary writes that politics is ‘‘a strife of
interest masquerading as a contest of principles.’’ Bierce certainly speaks for the cynics
of every generation. However, the phenomenon of politics is not exhausted by the
cynical point of view. When we talk about politics, we cannot avoid questions of truth
or falsity, good or bad, better or worse. If the cynics are correct, then Al Qaeda—the
Islamist terrorist group—cannot be condemned for its hijacking of American jets and
using them to destroy the World Trade Center, killing thousands of innocent people.
Talk concerning the legitimacy of terrorism, affirmative action, abortion, outrage
against political and financial corruption, and many other issues cannot be stripped of
all moral reference; we cannot really believe that politics has nothing to do with
morality or moral standards. Ambrose Bierce was at least partly wrong: Politics is also
the contest of moral principles!
The enterprise of political philosophy is the serious search for comprehensive
knowledge or wisdom about political things. We seek knowledge concerning the
following problems:
1. Human conflict—the nature and causes thereof.
2. The pursuit of power—the capacity to make others do our bidding.
3. The best or best possible cooperative social arrangements, capable of resolving or
diminishing society’s common problems.
4. The moral foundations of political legitimacy, liberty, equality, justice, and
human rights.
xxi
xxii INTRODUCTION TO AN INVITATION TO POLITICAL THOUGHT

5. Who should govern—one, few, or many.

6. The state and its nature, proper purpose, and limits.
These six issues, among others, require comprehensive knowledge of the facts
about human nature and human social relationships. These facts constitute the
descriptive dimension of political philosophy—the aspect of political philosophy that
describes how things are. We also need knowledge concerning the principles of
evaluation that enable us to construct and apply a standard to judge politics. The
principles of evaluation and the standards offered to judge politics are known as the
prescriptive or normative dimension of political philosophy—the aspect of political
philosophy that prescribes how things ought to be. These two dimensions are related:
The facts that we identify as worth describing in the human condition profoundly
affect our evaluations and prescriptions. At the same time, what we establish as a
sound basis for prescription leads us to focus on certain facts concerning the human
condition.
The six issues and questions just listed are neither understood nor answered
spontaneously if we simply gather social science data. Though these data are often
relevant, we need to know whether the facts of economic, social, religious, or political
practices support or refute our standards about human flourishing or welfare, human
dignity or fair treatment. Political philosophy is, then, fundamentally evaluative. We
need to know which standard we should affirm in evaluating the facts—and which
facts contribute to the construction of our standards. Facts and evaluations are thus
closely related.
The political philosophers we explore in this book claim to have good reasons for
the facts they consider significant and the moral standards they apply to evaluate these
six great political issues and questions. Some political philosophers offer good reasons
or arguments based primarily on extensive empirical social science evidence or historical
case studies; others base their arguments on a certain logic or pattern of ideas; and still
others emphasize the existence of moral claims based on either unaided human reason or
divine revelation, both of which offer humanity blueprints for the good life.
Political philosophy begins with the assumption that such public questions as
obedience to the law, the best possible government, or the justice of public policies are
in need of justification. We cannot imagine a human world without conflict over these
questions. As Sir Isaiah Berlin put it, political philosophy is possible ‘‘only in a world
where ends collide.’’i This is a world in which there is never-ending conflict over
public goals and power. Given such conflict, we need wisdom about political matters
that might enable us to persuade others whether particular political institutions or
policies are better or worse for society. Harvey Mansfield argues that politics and
political philosophy have one thing in common, and that is argument.ii Political
philosophers seek to judge partisans engaged in political debate, to make their claims
serve the public good, and to provide norms to evaluate the significance of facts that
political scientists submit to society.

i
Sir Isaiah Berlin, ‘‘Does Political Theory Still Exist?’’ in Philosophy, Politics and Society, Second Series,
(eds.) Peter Lastett and W. G. Runciman (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1962).
ii
Harvey Mansfield, A Student’s Guide to Political Philosophy (Wilmington, Delaware: ISI Books, 2001), 1 8.
 INTRODUCTION TO AN INVITATION TO POLITICAL THOUGHT xxiii

Political philosophers pursue their questions about political matters in response to

the specific problems of disorder and crisis found in society. They seek to present us
with a comprehensive vision of an ordered whole—a vision of a society that can be
better ordered or better governed. This comprehensive vision encompasses an attempt
to understand the human necessities, passions, and ambitions that propel us to
exercise political power, construct political institutions or constitutions, and pursue
justice or fairness in human relations. Leo Strauss, one of the most important 20th-
century political philosophers, puts it well when he states that political philosophy is
‘‘an attempt to truly know both the nature of political things and the right to the good,
political order.’’iii To be sure, the nature of political things and the good political order
are highly contested by both political philosophers and political partisans.iv

POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY: CONFLICT, DIAGNOSIS, ORDER

POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY AND CONFLICT
Situations of political conflict arise over differences in religion, gender, class, eco-
nomic interests, race, social status, and so forth. More specifically, political conflict
may occur over affirmative action, taxation, regulation of business, government aid to
parochial schools, Social Security, health care, terrorism, multiculturalism, and many
other subjects. Such conflicts can produce urgent social problems and disorder.
Edmund Burke argues that the pursuit of political philosophy takes place in a
condition of political disorder or decay, and that ‘‘the bulk of mankind are not
excessively curious concerning any theories whilst they are really happy; and one
symptom of an ill-conducted state is the propensity of the people to resort to them.’’v
Indeed, many of the great or epic political philosophers have pursued their
inquiries as a result of profound social conflict and decay in which, according to
Thomas Spragens, their respective political philosophies and comprehensive visions
‘‘are like pearls: they are not produced without an irritant.’’vi We will be examining
Plato’s political philosophy, which resulted from the death of Socrates; St. Augustine’s
political philosophy, which emerged as a result of the fall of Rome; Machiavelli’s
political philosophy, which sprang from Italy’s disunity; and Hobbes’s political
philosophy, which came from the English Civil War. Contemporary political philo-
sophies have resulted from the Nazi Holocaust, the crisis of liberal democracy, the
emergence of the bureaucratic state, globalization, gender inequality, political cor-
rectness, nuclear proliferation, terrorism, and various threats to individual liberty.
Political philosophy is not the study of great texts simply for antiquarian interest, as if
they were simply museum pieces. The great books of a Plato or a Machiavelli might

iii
Leo Strauss, What is Political Philosophy? and other Studies (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988),
p. 40, 172.
iv
Harvey Mansfield, A Student’s Guide to Political Philosophy (Wilmington, Delaware: ISI Books, 2001),
pp. 1 8.
v
Quoted by Daniel Boarstin, The Genius of American Politics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1953),
p. 1.
vi
Thomas Spragens, Jr., Understanding Political Theory (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1976), p. 20.
xxiv INTRODUCTION TO AN INVITATION TO POLITICAL THOUGHT

have emerged as a result of a particular historical irritant; yet their texts also transcend
their own times and continue to challenge contemporary political thinkers and
partisans to consider the richness of their alternative teachings as part of our
contemporary dialogues about our own political problems.
The comprehensive visions of these ‘‘epic’’vii political philosophers challenge us to
encompass the complexity of human nature, the social good, and politics by being
open to their profoundly diverse questions and diverse prescriptions for a truly decent
political order. To seek knowledge of the real complexity of human needs, aspirations,
and relationships is to pursue the philosophical approach to politics that seeks
wisdom. The historical approach to politics is most useful in helping us understand
the ‘‘irritants’’ that contributed to political philosophers’ desires to write texts with
comprehensive visions. The historical approach also lets us see the extent to which
there has been a dialogue in Western history over the past 2,500 years about certain
perennial issues of liberty, justice, gender, equality, the state, and so on. Finally, the
historical approach enables us to form our own dialogues about certain issues found in
Plato’s and Rousseau’s texts concerning equality, democracy, education, and the
common good. Reading their texts comparatively is an excellent way to begin the
pursuit of knowledge and wisdom about politics. The approach to these epic political
thinkers and their great teachings is primarily philosophical in that it assumes that our
democracy is enhanced by many citizens being intellectually capable of challenging
both the ignorant and the powerful.

POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY AND DIAGNOSIS

Political philosophers provide a comprehensive vision of the political when they raise
questions and provide some (often tentative) answers about the most important
factors that cause conflict, disorder, corruption, violence, terrorism, exploitation,
or revolution. By so doing, they lead us to focus on the particular factors that cause
political disorder or order. For example, Hobbes examines human passions; Plato
discusses differences as the basis for justice; Machiavelli focuses on human deception
and its relevance to successful political leadership; and Marx addresses the role that
economic inequality and class conflict play in forming a political system. The epic
political philosophers are not satisfied in simply describing public disorder or
discontent: They seek to diagnose the causes of human conflict. For example, Marx
is not satisfied simply to describe economic class conflict in society; he shows that the
unequal material distribution of resources causes that conflict. Such descriptions of
human conflicts and disorder are united with the political philosopher’s diagnosis of
the disorder’s causes and then related to his or her prescription for a political therapy
that will make public life better. Indeed, as Thomas Spragens puts it, ‘‘the causal
analysis which a political theorist provides in his examination of the sources of
political disorder decisively shapes his prescriptive conclusions. Sound diagnoses must
precede beneficial therapy.’’viii

vii
Sheldon Wolin, Politics and Vision (U.S.A.: University Presses of California, Columbia, Princeton , 2006).
viii
Spragens, p. 75.
 INTRODUCTION TO AN INVITATION TO POLITICAL THOUGHT xxv

POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY AS PRESCRIPTION OR POLITICAL THERAPY

The political philosopher offers his or her prescription or therapy by identifying
appropriate norms or standards, which help to resolve or diminish human social
conflicts, thereby creating a better political order. Which is the best form of govern-
ment? Are there proper limits to freedom? What type of equality should be the basis of
public policies—equal rights, equal opportunities, equal results? What should be the
basis for just treatment of individuals or groups? In addition to establishing a norm or
standard for the best form of government, many political philosophers discuss the
conditions under which the best is achievable and workable. If the best form is not
achievable, what is the most workable or best possible form under particular
conditions?
Among the political philosophers, various conflicting norms are claimed—such
as Plato’s ‘‘justice,’’ which is the harmony of individuals in society in which all
pursue the tasks they are most capable of performing—(‘‘minding one’s own
business’’); or Marx’s social ‘‘justice,’’ which occurs when each person gives freely
of his or her different talents for the public good and everyone’s basic needs are
equally provided for; or finally Hobbes’s ‘‘justice,’’ which is the social situation in
which the state’s sovereign is obeyed absolutely. Which of these conflicting norms
concerning justice is true or workable in terms of human needs, talents, and
resources? Leo Strauss is convinced that human beings will never create a society
free of contradictions—perhaps even including contradictory norms. When we read
political philosophers and their different and conflicting norms, we are invited
to reflect upon the norms we hold, or to discuss with others whether we should
accommodate, tolerate, integrate, or reject these norms in our own imperfect public
life.
In summary, we can say that a political philosophy has factual (descriptive),
diagnostic (causal), and evaluative (prescriptive) dimensions to its comprehensive
vision of politics as conflict over power and modes of social cooperation. Although
we can and should separately analyze these three dimensions in each political
philosopher’s teachings, we would be missing a great deal if we did not also examine
the comprehensive vision of an ordered whole that each political philosopher seeks
to convey. To see this comprehensive vision, we must notice to what extent a
political philosopher identifies facts about human conflict that he or she regards as
significant; conditions that cause conflict; and norms that will provide therapy in
evaluating, resolving, or diminishing that conflict. The norms help us identify which
facts of human life are truly salient in understanding both human conflict and
cooperation. Understanding certain facts of human life helps us justify the validity of
norms as we evaluate the six major political issues discussed earlier. For example, to
St. Augustine a crucial fact of human life is the original sin of Adam and Eve and our
inheritance of that sin of human rebelliousness against God. That fact is directly
related to his view that a valid norm of the state and its power must be to serve as
a divine remedy for human sinfulness. To be sure, there is much more to
St. Augustine’s view of the state than this simple statement. Yet we can read
St. Augustine’s text to see how his facts, diagnosis, and norms create a compre-
hensive vision of an ordered whole.
xxvi INTRODUCTION TO AN INVITATION TO POLITICAL THOUGHT

EXPLORING THE WORLDVIEW OF A POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY:

THE MAJOR QUESTIONS
The great books of the political philosophers come to us from the problems and crises
of their times. And they emerge from the sense of wonder of the political thinker who is
open to the possibility of truth regarding (1) wisdom about the nature of the cosmos;
(2) human nature and its relation to the cosmos; (3) the good society; and (4) the role of
politics in human life (the philosophical approach). These four dimensions comprise
the worldview of the political philosopher. This four-part structure of the worldview
helps us unpack the comprehensive vision of each political philosopher to compare
them historically—from Plato to Mill to Nietzsche. Studying political philosophy,
according to Leo Strauss, ‘‘consists . . . in listening to conversations between the great
philosophers . . . the greatest minds, and therefore in studying the great books.’’ix
For thousands of years human beings have asked questions about themselves,
their role in the universe, and the purpose of their existence. Aristotle called this our
sense of wonder—an innate and impelling necessity to seek the answers to these
fundamental questions. Questions about the cosmos include the following: What is
ultimate reality? Is it spirit or matter? Is the universe ordered or chaotic? Does a God or
gods exist? Is life random or providentially guided? Is the universe inclined toward the
good and the just, as St. Thomas Aquinas claims, or is it devoid of objective moral
purpose, as Nietzsche claims? Can we know the answers or tentative answers to these
questions? If so, how? By empirical evidence? By reason? By faith and divine
revelation? G.K. Chesterton explains the practical relevance of our wider view of
the universe:
There are some people and I am one of them who think that the most practical
and important thing about a man is still his view of the universe. We think that for a
landlady considering a lodger it is important to know his income, but still more import
ant to know his philosophy. We think that for a general about to fight an enemy it is
important to know the enemy’s numbers, but still more important to know the
enemy’s philosophy. We think the question is not whether the theory of the cosmos
affects matters, but whether in the long run anything else affects them.

HUMAN NATURE
Only by focusing on political philosophers’ teaching about human nature can we
explore their response to the six fundamental questions of politics discussed pre-
viously. Human nature is the bedrock of any political philosophy. Human beings are
clearly distinguished from other species by the fact of self-consciousness. We are aware
that we exist, and this gives our lives a sense of meaning or significance. We have been
enjoined by the great Socrates to know ourselves—perhaps better than we have in the
past. What is our nature? Do we have certain essential, unchanging qualities that make
us human? If so, what are they? Are we primarily individualistic or communitarian? Is
the human being by nature a ‘‘political animal’’ as Aristotle claims? Or are we wolves
to our fellow human beings as Hobbes claims? Is our human nature changing or

ix
Leo Strauss, Liberalism: Ancient and Modern (New York: Basic Books, 1968), p. 7.
 INTRODUCTION TO AN INVITATION TO POLITICAL THOUGHT xxvii

unchanging over time? Are we naturally good and perfectible? Can we improve
ourselves? Are we equal as human beings in a politically relevant sense? If so, in what
ways? Do humans possess a certain dignity demanding respect and recognition? If so,
what is that human dignity, and what rights are related to it?x
After considering the answers a particular political philosopher gives to some of
these questions, we can begin to identify the comprehensive vision that emerges from
his or her view of ultimate reality, human nature, the good society, politics, and the
state. This text, which is an invitation to the study of political philosophy, uses the
historical approach primarily to provoke you to consider the great importance of
increasing the number of people in our democracy who can think critically and engage
in reasoned argument about political issues.
Our text provides you with both guidance and key primary source selections. We
offer well-crafted guides to some of the major political philosophers. You will be
guided through their writings and issues as we discuss some of the great controversies
of interpreting their texts, as well as questions for reflection and application of specific
ideas to contemporary controversies. In each case we employ the following frame-
work:
 The biographical, intellectual, and historical context of the political philosopher.
 Worldview and method of investigation: the theological, ontological, epistemo-
logical, and ethical foundations of the political philosopher’s view of religion,
reality, knowledge, and moral norms.
 The philosopher’s views about the nature of politics and the role of the state.
 Problems of politics and the state, addressing controversial questions concerning
freedom, equality, justice, public order, law, and ethics, and political change
advocated by the political philosopher.
 The contribution and influence of the political philosopher regarding problems
and case studies such as gender, just war, music, politics, biotechnology, and
tyrannicide.
 The key concepts employed by the political philosopher.
 An annotated bibliography, including Web links.

CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING A POLITICAL PHILOSOPHER

This text examines a highly diverse group of political philosophers from Plato to
Nietzsche who afford the reader various standards for justifying particular forms of
politics and the state. The reader should look for the philosophers’ reasons for these
prescriptions. Political relationships and the use of state coercive power have far-
reaching effects on human well-being or misery. How, then, can we evaluate the
adequacy of a political philosophy?
How intelligible is the political philosopher’s use of these key concepts in political
or public discourse? Some background about how the political philosopher uses these
concepts in the context of his or her time is needed. Recognition must also be given to

x
For an excellent discussion of five images of human nature, see Elizabeth Monroe Drews and Leslie
Lipson, Values and Humanity (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1971), Chapter 1.
xxviii INTRODUCTION TO AN INVITATION TO POLITICAL THOUGHT

the meaning a political philosopher assigns to a key concept posited as a norm.

The concept is a communicative device. For example, when Thomas Hobbes employs
the notion of the state of nature, he does so to prescribe an enlarged concept of state
authority. When Karl Marx discusses his concept of equality, he advocates the
abolition of economic and class differences. We must ask how each political philo-
sopher’s use of such concepts as equality and the state of nature can be justified. Are the
terms clearly and coherently used by the political philosopher to communicate
political teachings? Does empirical evidence or history justify for the philosopher’s
use of these concepts? Aristotle studied 158 constitutions of his time. Hobbes cites
empirical data for his thesis of human egoism. Machiavelli studied historical and
contemporary case studies of leadership in formulating his political advice. Rousseau
cites anthropological and ethnographic studies. Although such empirical knowledge is
necessary for the development of a comprehensive vision, it is far from sufficient.
Ultimately, we need to examine how soundly political philosophers reason about
the truth or validity of their norms like justice, equality, and liberty. Are we capable of
knowing which norms are true or valid and therefore which political concepts are
appropriate in political communication and debate? Are we slaves of our passions? Or
is reason capable of discerning the meaning of our existence, such as the meaning of
human community? Are we capable of grasping objective moral principles? As we will
see, political philosophers differ considerably about what role reason can play in
justifying the validity of various political norms. They disagree sharply over which
human beings can reason soundly and what role political education can play in
cultivating or nurturing human rationality.
We invite you to begin the journey of considering these enduring issues and
questions of political philosophy. We invite you to engage in dialogue with these epic
thinkers. We expect that you will learn something from each of them and intellectually
contend with all of them.