Western Political Thought

Western Political Thought
Section A
1. Plato
2. Aristotle
3. Machiavelli
4. Montesquieu
5. Hobbes
6. Locke
7. Rousseau
8. Kant
9. Mill
10. Bentham
11. Hegel
12. Marx
13. Lenin
14. Mao
15. Gramsci
16. Kai Popper
17. Pierre Bourdieu
18. John Rawis
19. Frances Fukuyama
20. Foucault
21. Derrida Kierkegard
22. Jean Paul Sartre
23. Rene Descarte
1.Plato
2.Aristotle
3.Machiavelli
Machiavelli
• He personifies the transformation from the medieval to the
modern era .
• Lived during the renaissance; period of new science; a revolt
against traditional constraints subjected to the church.
• The emergence of modern political institution, the nation-
state: England, France, Spain.
INTRODUCTION
• He was born in Florence, and during that time Italy was not a nation but collection
of mostly small, independent city-states which were in conflict with each other.
• • Florence was invaded by France, and a new government was established
replacing the Medici family.
• He joined this new government. He was a high-level civil servant in charge of
military operations. He also served the diplomatic corps as an envoy from Florence
to various rulers.
• French was then defeated by Spanish; Medici were restored to power.
• Machiavelli was suspected of treason by the new rulers and was imprisoned and
tortured. He was exiled to his country home.
• He started writing; – The Prince, 1513
Machiavelli’s The Prince
• Historical Overview
• Human Nature and Power
• Fortune & Virtue
• Forms of Government
I. Historical Overview
• Niccolò Machiavelli (1469 – 1527)
• European Renaissance
• Declining power of Church
• Advancing in Science, Arts,
Literature
• The Prince written in 1513 during
period of political exile
Copernican Universe
• Machiavelli & Florence
• Medici family rules city
• French forces invade, set up
republican government
• Machiavelli gets role in
government, ends up as high civil
servant, some diplomatic missions
and military operations
• Spanish defeat the French, and reinstall the Medici
• Machiavelli is arrested, tortured, and eventually exiled to his country home
beyond the city walls
• During this period (he’s in his 40s) he begins his philosophical/political
writing, including The Prince
• Prince is dedicated to Lorenzo de Medici, the Magnificent
• But this Medici is the grandson of the founder of the Medici dynasty, Lorenzo
il Magnifico, the genuine Lorenzo the Magnificent
Machiavelli & Florence
• The Prince as extended job application?
• Two aims:
1. Secure a government job
2. Provide recipe for stabilizing Italian city states to protect them from outside
interference, whether civil or ecclesiastical
II. Human Nature and Power
“The desire to acquire is truly a very natural and common thing; and
whenever men who can, do so, they are praised and not condemned;
but when they cannot and want to do so just the same, herein lies the
mistake and the condemnation.” (Chapter 3).
• Contrast with Greeks/Aquinas
• Implications?
• Human beings are selfish animals
• Need to construct a political life which is based on how people actually
behave, not how we want them to be
• But…
• Doesn’t want to reject either rational politics (the Greeks) or religious
salvation (the church) out of hand
• Rather, the goals of these two projects must come not from directives
by external sources but through personal choices
• These personal choices will only come about if and when we
appreciate the factors that motivate people in making their choices
• Each individual is fully responsible for his/her choices
• Each of us share this responsibility since we each share the same
human nature
• Power
• Machiavelli the first political thinker to focus on power as positive trait
• Simple recognition of the fact that the quest for power is an essential part of
human nature
• Why?
• If we want to acquire possessions, then that implies that we also
want the means to acquire those possessions
• Need to recognize that for rulers the study of power is vital: how to
acquire it, how to keep it, how to use it
“Many writers have imagined for themselves republics and principalities
that have never been seen nor known to exist in reality; for there is such a
gap between how one lives and how one ought to live that anyone who
abandons what is done for what ought to be done learns his ruin rather
than his preservation…” (chapter 15)
“for a man who wishes to profess goodness

at all times will come to ruin among so
many who are not good” (chapter 15).
• Indeed, Machiavelli asserts:
“For one can generally say this about men: they are ungrateful, fickle,
simulators and deceivers, avoiders of danger, greedy for gain; and while
you work for their good they are completely yours, offering you their
blood, their property, their lives, and their sons, as I said earlier, when
danger is far away; but when it comes nearer to you they turn away”
(chapter XVII).
• So if a Prince or ruler wants to stay in power, he must
“Learn how not to be good, and to use this knowledge or not to use it
according to necessity” (chapter XV)
• What does this mean?
• Machiavelli is not advising us to behave badly simply for the sake of
being evil
• Rather since we see power in political life we need to counsel rulers
on how best to use it
• Basic advice, don’t help others, be cruel, stingy, deceptive…
• And get others to do the dirty work so you can escape blame
• “You must, therefore, know that there are two means of fighting: one
according to the laws, the other with force; the first way is proper to
man, the second to beasts; but because the first, in many cases is not
sufficient, it becomes necessary to have recourse to the second”
(chapter XVIII).
“Since, then, a prince must know how to make good
use of the nature of the beast, he should choose from
among the beasts the
fox and the lion; for the lion
cannot defend itself from
traps and the fox cannot
protect itself from wolves. It
is therefore necessary to be a
fox in order to recognize the
traps and a lion in order to
frighten the wolves.”
• Examples?
• Chapter VII
• “Cesare Borgia acquired the state
through the favour and help of his
father, and when this no longer
existed, he lost it, and this despite the
fact that he did everything and used
every means that a prudent and skilful
man ought to use in order to root
himself securely in those states that
the arms and fortune of others had
granted him”
• Background here:
• Cesare’s father? Pope Alexander VI
• The Pope put Cesare in charge of Florence, and issued a formal papal bull
(order) authorizing him to expand the power of Florence
• What were some of the means used by this “prudent” and “skilful” man?
• Later in the chapter we get one example
• Borgia takes over Romagna, but is meeting resistance since “it was
ruled by powerless noblemen who had been quicker to despoil their
subjects than to govern them, and gave them cause to disunite rather
than to unite them”
• He decided it was necessary to bring “peace and obedience of the
law” and installed a man named Remirro de Orca, a “cruel and
efficient man” to rule
• Then, after the area was pacified, Borgia does the following:
• “Since he knew that the severities of the past had brought about a
certain amount of hate, in order to purge the minds of those people
and win them over completely, he planned to demonstrate that if
cruelty of any kind had come about, it did not stem from him [Borgia]
but rather from the bitter nature of the minister…”
• “And having found the
occasion to do this, he had
him placed one morning in
Cesena on the piazza in two
pieces with a piece of wood
and a bloodstained knife
alongside him.”
• “The atrocity of such a spectacle left those people at one and the
same time satisfied and stupefied.”
• Story of Agathocles the Sicilian (chapter VIII)
• Story of Oliverotto of Fermo (chapter VII)
• Footnote:
• A year after the events described here (1512), Cesare had Fermo strangled
and the corpse displayed on the main square of Senigallia for 3 days
• Conclusion?
• “In taking a state its conqueror should weigh all the harmful things he must
do and do them all at once so as not to have to repeat them every day, and in
not repeating them to be able to make men feel secure and win them over
with the benefits he bestows upon them”
• Machiavelli is not counseling the need to be cruel, nor denying that
cruelty is sometimes useful, but rather showing how to limit its worst
effects
• The primary requirement for selfish individuals seeking personal goals
is to enter into reciprocal relationships where each needs power or
influence over the behavior of others
• In entering these relationships, all are equal in their selfishness, and
all are free to seek power
• He’s not saying that people will never act on the common good, only
that they will do so only if they see an identity between their private
interest and the common good
• Those who appear good or altruistic to others are either rational
actors really motivated by desire for personal advantage, or ruled by
laziness and retreating from their political responsibilities
• “And it is essential to understand this: that a prince, and especially a
new prince, cannot observe all those things for which men are
considered good, for in order to maintain the state he is often obliged
to act against his promise, against charity, against humanity, and
against religion…”
• “And therefore, it is necessary that he have a mind ready to turn itself
according to the way the winds of fortune and the changeability of
affairs require him; and, as I said above, as long as it is possible, he
should not stray from the good, but he should know how to enter into
evil when necessity commands” (Chapter XVIII).
III. Fortune and Virtue
• But what happens if you follow Machiavelli’s principles?
• Is success guaranteed
• Recall the passage about Cesare Borgia, the model for much of
Machiavelli’s discussion:
“Cesare Borgia acquired
the state through the
favour and help of his
father, and when this no
longer existed, he lost it,
and this despite the fact
that he did everything
and used every means
that a prudent and skilful
man ought to use in order
to root himself securely in
those states that the
arms and fortune of
others had granted him”
(emphasis added)
• Machiavelli recognizes that sometimes, despite the best planning,
education, and skill, events still turn out badly
• That is, fortune or luck is also a part of our political life
• Chapter XXV
• “I judge it to be true that fortune is the arbiter of one half of our
actions, but that she still leaves the control of the other half, or
almost that, to us.”
• Flooding river analogy
• What to do?
1. Follow Machiavelli’s prescriptions. That is, learn the virtues of ruling
2. “I also believe that the man who adapts his course of action to the nature
of the times will succeed and, likewise, that the man who sets his course of
action out of tune with the times will come to grief” (XVIII).
• In other words, a good ruler is one who can adapt to changing
circumstances
• It means knowing when to be cautious and hesitant, or bold and
forceful, as the occasion demands.
• Knowing what to do and when to do it is part of Machiavelli’s
understanding of virtue
• Unlike the ancient philosophers or Christian theologians, virtue is
divorced from the idea of a code of conduct, of “good” versus “bad”
ways of acting
• Instead, for Machiavelli, virtue is individualistic [contra the Greeks and
Romans] and secular [contra the Church]
• Not some idealistic merit or moral goodness, but …
• A true selfishness that enables individuals to get what they value, whether power, wealth,
fame, etc.
• Those who get what they seek have demonstrated their virtue and they are judged, in
Machiavelli’s criteria, as good.
• By adapting – by adjusting cunning and strength, by following the fox and the lion – a
virtuous ruler is one who can see trouble on the horizon (the work of fortune) and act rather
than be taken off-guard by changing events
• Because a political state is passive (events happen to it), it needs
constant attention devoted to creating order and avoiding disorder
IV. Forms of Government
• What is the best way to maintain the state?
• What is the best form of government?
• What are the basic forms of government?
• Unlike Aristotle, Machiavelli argues that basically we have two
forms:
1. Republic
2. Monarchy
“All the states, all the dominions that have had and still have power
over men, were and still are either republics or principalities” (first
sentence, Chapter 1)
• But throughout The Prince, that distinction blurs a bit, with
monarchies or “civic principalities” ending up looking very similar to
republics
• The real distinction is then between republics and tyrannies (i.e.,
those monarchies or principalities which differ from republics).
• Republics:
• Founded by a strong, inspirational leader rallying the citizenry
• Based on law
• Governed in the interest of the majority, not of a special elite
• Mixed class – members of all classes have opportunity to participate
• Note, republics require a special citizenry: active, engaged, public
spirited
• Unlikely to have those conditions in every area, so tyranny is
inevitable
• Tyrannies
• Masses are subjects, not active participants in political life
• Ruling classes enjoy more liberty, and when interests of rulers conflict with
liberty of the masses, the rulers prevail
• The masses are content with this arrangement since they recognize that
without the ruler, anarchy would ensue, or
• They’re content because they are either fearful or awestruck of the powers
that be
• Lacking the virtue of citizens in a republic, the masses under tyrannical
regimes both merit and need tyranny
• And when a tyrant is stuck governing a bunch of corrupt, vulgar masses who
lack virtue, then ordinary morality is not binding and he/she/they can pretty
much do what they must to stay in power
• https://www.slideshare.net/fatinnazihahaziz/topic-11-machiavelli
4. Baron de Montesquieu
Understanding the Principles of Government and law of Baron de

Montesquieu
Baron de Montesquieu Biography
Charles Louis de Secondat was born in
Bordeaux, France, in 1689 to a wealthy family.
Despite his family’s wealth, he was placed in
the care of a poor family during his childhood.
De Secondat studied science and history in
college, eventually becoming a lawyer in the
local government. Charles de Secondat,
Baron de la Brede et
After his father’s death, he was placed under de Montesquieu
the care of his uncle, Baron de Montesquieu.
When his uncle died, de Secondat acquired his
title and his fortune.
Baron de Montesquieu
Montesquieu’s book, On the Spirit of Laws, published in

1748, was his most famous work.
It outlined his ideas on how government would best
work.
He believed that all things were made up of rules or laws
that never changed. He set out to study these laws
scientifically with the hope that knowledge of the laws of
government would reduce the problems of society and
improve human life.
Types of Government
According to Montesquieu, there were three types of government:
• a monarchy (ruled by a king or queen),
• a republic (ruled by an elected leader), and
• a despotism (ruled by a dictator).
Separation of powers
• Montesquieu believed that a government that was elected by the
people was the best form of government.
• He argued that the best government would be one in which power
was balanced among three groups of officials-and idea he called
“separation of powers.”
• His ideas became the basis for the United States Constitution.
Key Words:
• Discuss what you think these key words mean:
• separation of powers
is the principle of dividing the powers of a government among different branches to
guard against abuse of authority. A government of separated powers assigns
different political and legal powers to the legislative, executive, and judicial branches
• republican government
a type of government which is ruled by an elected leader, rather than a monarch or
dictator
• equalityis under
the beliefthe
thatlaw
all people receive fair and equal protection by the government
through written law
• https://www.biography.com/scholar/charles-louis-de-secondat
• http://www.americassurvivalguide.com/montesquieu.php
• https://www.powershow.com/viewht/1768f1-ZDc1Z/Montesquieu_p
owerpoint_ppt_presentation
5.Hobbes
Thomas Hobbes (1588 – 1679)
• Wrote Leviathan, explaining the creation and preservation of an
authoritative government .
• Within Leviathan, Hobbes discusses the nature of man, the state of
nature, the social contract, the laws of nature, political power, liberty
and law, and the sovereign power
• It is the most logical, systematic treatise in British political theory
• Concerns the structure of society. He argues for a social contract and
rule by a sovereign.
The Nature of Man
• He believed that the state power was a “mortal god to which we owe
under the immortal God our peace and defense”
• Man desires power overall; riches, knowledge and honor are but
different forms of power.
• That which men desire, they are also said to love; and to hate those
things for which they aversion. Because the constitution of a man's
body is in continual mutation, it is impossible that all the same things
should always cause in him the same reaction.
• The passions that most of all cause the difference of wit are the
desire of power, of riches, of knowledge, and of honour
• All of these can be reduced to the first, desire of power, for the rest are but
several sorts of power .
• There is a general inclination of all mankind, a perpetual and restless desire of
power after power, that ceases only in death.
• This is not only because man wants more and more power, but also because
he cannot assure the power and means to live well .
• Kings, whose power is greatest, turn their endeavors to assuring power at
home by laws, and abroad by wars.
• Competition of riches, honor, command, or other power, inclined to
contention, enmity, and war: because the way of one competitor, for
attaining his desire, is to kill, subdue,supplant, or repel the other
The State of Nature
• All men are created equal

• 3 causes of quarrel: Competition, safety,Glory
• Defines war as: the time during which man lives without a common
power , All other times are peace
• Nature made men equal, in the faculties of body and mind; as that though there be found one
man stronger in body or quicker in mind than another
• For as to the strength of body, the weakest has strength enough to kill the strongest, either by
secret machination, or by confederacy with others that are in the same danger as himself
• Therefore if any two men desire the same thing, which nevertheless they cannot both enjoy, they
become enemies; and in the way to their end endeavor to destroy, or subdue one another
• And because of this, there is no way for any man to secure himself
• There are three principal causes of quarrel
• The first is competition
• The second is safety
• The third is glory or reputation
The Social Contract
• All men should be able to live without anything impeding their natural liberties.
• The right of nature is the liberty each man has to use his own power as he
chooses, for preservation of his own life.
• Liberty is the absence of external impediments
• A Law of Nature is a general rule, found out by reason, by which a man is
forbidden to do, which is destructive to his life, or takes away the means of
preserving it
• One general rule of reason is "that every man ought to endeavor peace as far as
he has hope of obtaining it; and when he cannot obtain it, that he may seek,
and use all helps and advantages of war"
• The mutual transferring of rights, is that which men call Contract.
Laws of Nature
• We are obligated to transfer our natural liberties to our rights.

• Men perform their covenants made.
• Men will follow through with their promises.
• The laws of nature are immutable and eternal; for injustice,
ingratitude, arrogance, pride, iniquity, acceptation of persons and the
rest, can never be made lawful; For it can never be that war shall
preserve life, and peace destroy it
Political Power
• Greatest of human powers is: that which is compounded by the
powers of many men.
• He states the laws of nature: Justice, Equity, Modesty, Mercy And do
unto others what you would have them do unto you.
• He details a sovereign and a commonwealth.
• He supports monarchal sovereignty because it keeps society stable
• The greatest of human powers, is that which is compounded of the powers of
most men, united by consent, in one person, natural, or civil, that has the use of
all their powers depending on his will; such is the power of the commonwealth.
• A commonwealth is when a multitude of men are made one person, when they
are by one man, or one person, represented .
• The only way to erect such a common power, as may be able to defend the
multitude from the invasion of foreigners, and the injuries of one another, and
thereby secure them, is to confer all their power and strength upon one man, or
upon an assembly of men.
• The commonwealth has power over everything
• A sovereign power, whether monarchy or commonwealth is basically infallible
The care of the sovereign is to make good
laws
• 1. A good law does not mean a just law, for all laws are just
• 2. A good law is one that is needful, for the good of the people
• Therefore a law that is not needful is not a good law
• *** A law may be conceived to be good, when it is done for the
benefit of the sovereign; though it be not necessary for the people;
• The good of the sovereign and people cannot be separated
Liberty and Law
• States that subjects should remain faithful until the sovereign loses
the power to protect his subjects
The Sovereign Power
• Sovereign’s power should be supreme All subjects must follow civil
laws Civil law: Those rules which the commonwealth hath
commanded him, by word, writing, to make use at, for the distinction
of right, and wrong; that is to say, of what is contrary, and what is not
contrary to their rule.
• Subjects have to follow the rules of the sovereign in order to have a
stable society
Leviathan
• The basis for agreement between men was not their common
possession of reason.
• Any valid explanation of society and government must take account
of the real nature of man.
• Man was the creator of his own society.
• Man was motivated by his appetitesdesires, fear, and self-interest,
seeking pleasure and avoiding pain.
• Since the powers men had were essentially equal, there was a
natural strife as men sought to satisfy their desires
• To escape this intolerable situation, where every individual lived for
himself, and to obtain peace and order, men agreed to form a
society.
• Men surrendered their rights of self-assertion in order to set up a
power capable of enforcing its authority.
• They gave up their rights to defend themselves, made a social
contract and created a sovereign order was secured by this sovereign
Summary
• English Philosopher
• Influenced by the English Civil War & Charles I Execution
• 1651 – Published Leviathan (Sea Monster)
• Argued that natural law made absolute monarchy the best form of gov’t
• Humans were natural selfish and violent
• People couldn’t make their own decisions
• If they did life would be “nasty, brutish, and short”
• Only a strong ruler (Leviathan) could give people direction
6.Locke
WHO IS JOHN LOCKE?
• John Locke , was an English philosopher and physician regarded as
one of the most influential of Enlightenment thinkers and known as
the "Father of Classical Liberalism".
• Born: August 29, 1632, Wrington, United Kingdom
• Died: October 28, 1704, Essex, United Kingdom
• Nationality: English
• Education: Westminster School, Christ Church, Oxford
A BIOGRAPHY OF JOHN LOCKE (1632-
1704)
• John Locke was born on August 29th, 1632 in England and lived to
became one of the most influential people in England and, perhaps,
one of the most influential people of the 17th century.
• Before his death on October 28th, 1704 he would earn the title as the
Father of liberal philosophy.
• His ideas would also be used as a keystone for the revolution of the
North American colonies from England.
EARLY YEARS
• Locke had many prominent friends who were nobles in government and also highly respected
scholars of the times.
• He was good friends with the Earl of Shaftesbury and he was given government jobs which he
served with Shaftesbury.
• Locke lived in France for a while and returned to troubled times in England. In 1679 his friend
the Earl was tried for treason.
• Although Shaftesbury was acquitted, the Earl decided to flee England anyway to escape
further persecution.
• He fled to Holland where William and Mary ruled but had some claim to the English throne.
Owing to his close association with the Earl, Locke also fled fled to Holland in 1683.
• He returned to England in about 1688 when William and Mary were invited to retake the
reign of England in what historians call the Bloodless Revolution. Eventually Locke returned to
Oates in Essex where he retired. He lived there until his death in 1704.
JOHN LOCKE
• His theory understood the citizen were to establish their own

government & to do this intelligibility & responsibly ,they had to be
educated.
• -Believed that at birth human mind is a blank slate; a tabula rasa
(empty of ideas).
• -All ideas are based on sensation – arriving at explanation by
observing phenomena. -Learning should be a gradual process ,slow &
cumulative -Education goal was to cultivate ethical individuals
-Contribute to modern education :”learning by doing “& interaction
with the environment.
CONCEPT OF EDUCATION PIONEER IN EDUCATION
• THEORY OF VALUE
• -THEORY OF KNOWLEDGE
• -THEORY OF HUMAN NATURE
• -THEORY OF LEARNING
• -THEORY OF TRANSMISSION
• -THEORY OF SOCIETY
• -THEORY OF OPPORTUNITY
• -THEORY OF CONSENSUS
THEORY OF VALUE
• What knowledge and skills are worthwhile learning? What are the goals of Education?
• The skill and knowledge needed to order our actions in accordance with the laws of nature; to
treat our possessions and persons responsibly, and to avoid coming under the absolute control
of others (Yolton, p. 16)
• Acquiring knowledge frequently establishes a habit of doing so -satisfying natural curiosity
frequently establishes the habit of loving and esteeming all learning (Deighton, p. 23)
• Pursuit of truth is a duty we owe to God and ourselves (Cranston, p. 23)
• The goal of education is the welfare and prosperity of the nation -Locke conceived the nations's
welfare and prosperity in terms of the personal happiness and social usefulness of its citizens
(Deighton, p. 20)
• Education for Locke provides the character formation necessary for becoming a person and for
being a responsible citizen (Yolton, p. 3) His education philosophy is an effort to show how
democratic constitutional monarchy might be preserved and improved (Deighton, p. 20)
THEORY OF KNOWLEDGE
• How is it different from belief?
• What is a mistake? A lie?
• Knowledge is publicly verifiable, measurable, plain, demonstrable facts - not
imagination (Cranston, p. 17)
• the best instance of knowing is intuiting - by intuiting is meant a power which
the mind possesses of apprehending truth (Aaron, p. 221) Knowledge, like
good character, is a set of mental habits rather than a body of belief
(Deighton, p. 21)
• Knowledge is limited to imperfections of ideas we have; we can have
probable knowledge even when we can't have certain knowledge (Cranston,
p.22)
• Knowledge is the perception of the agreement or disagreement of
two ideas (Hutchins, p. 347)
• - may be four sorts: identity or diversity, relation, co-existence and
real existence Knowing is an infallible intuition; opening is coming to a
conclusion after weighing the evidence, but without certainty (Aaron,
p 248).
• Mistakes and lies would be a lack of evidence and defiance of
evidence.
THEORY OF HUMAN NATURE
• What is a human being?

• How does it differ from other species?
• What are the limits of human potential?
• Man becomes moral through education - humans have no innate ideas of God, no innate
moral truths, no natural inclination of virtue - Locke defined man as both rational and
moral (Yolton, p. 26, 27)
• Man is subject to the rule of natural law which was ultimately God's law made known to
man through the voice of reason (Cranston, p. 11)
• Locke's denial of innate ideas put a premium on individual effort, on the labor necessary
to gain knowledge from experience (Tarcov, P. 83).
• Man could be ruled and be free - man is endowed with natural rights such as life, liberty
and property (Cranston,, p. 12)
THEORY OF LEARNING
• What is learning? How are skills and knowledge acquired?

• The learning that gentlemen should possess is general, according to Locke (Deighton, p 21).
• Learning is the last and least part of education. Learning is a great help to virtue and wisdom,
but without them it produces only the more foolish or worse men (Tarcov, p. 198)
• From infancy onwards, the child's efforts toward bodily pleasure and toward power in
possessions and over others should be thoroughly frustrated. The result will be that habits of
self-centered, aggressive behavior and of preferring ignorance to learning will not become
established (Deighton, p. 22)
• Skills and knowledge are acquired by example and practice instead of charging of children's
memories with rules and principals (Cranston, p. 16)
• Unconscious habits are bred by practice and manners learned by example (Cranston, p. 16)
THEORY OF TRANSMISSION
• Who is to teach? By what methods? What will the curriculum be?

• The goal of the gentlemen's education cannot be achieved by sending him to a
school. Learning should be superintended by a tutor assisted by genuinely interested
parents (Deighton, p. 22
• For working classes, poor children of both sexes between the ages of 3-14 should be
compelled to attend school with "teachers" (Deighton p. 20)
• Locke attacked ordinary method of teaching - manners learned by example, latin
learned by speaking (cranston p. 16)
• The best way to get men to do what is wanted is not t terrify or force them but to
motivate them, to arouse and then rely on desires, while letting them think, not
without justice, that they are acting for their own sakes and of their own free will
(Tarcov, p. 98)
• Methods for poor - learn by practice; for gentlemen - bring pupil to practice the activities of the
gentlemanly ideal until they become habitual (Deighton, p., 22)
• Curriculum for the poor: focus on regular worship for sake of religion and moral improvement,
handicrafts and agricultural skills, vocational arts - may have intended that young should learn
to read, write and do math but made no statements to that effect (Deighton, p. 20)
• Curriculum for gentlemen: health - the first ingredient of personal happiness; development of
good character - consisting of three groups of habits - virtue, wisdom and breeding; to include
reading, writing and arithmetic, Latin, language and literature (Greek for scholars only) ;
literature of France and England, the natural and social sciences; the arts should occupy a
minor place -which Locke considered a useless or dangerous thing (Deighton, p. 21-22)
• Learning -that gentlemen should possess is general; detailed learning is only for those who
would become scholars; one should know in detail what is directly useful in managing personal
affairs. (deighton, p. 21)
THEORY OF SOCIETY
• What is society? What institutions are involved in the educational process? Men once lived in
a state of natural anarchy but had banded together to form political society (Cranston, p. 11)
• Men entrusted power to rulers on the condition that natural rights were respected by rulers.
Natural rights and natural law are rooted in edicts of God which were inalienable (Cranston,
p. 12, 13)
• Men possess these traits: 1) natural freedom - right to life and liberty; 2) necessity for labor;
and 3) capacity of reason - from # 1 & 2 - f lows right of property in things which is chief
factor in foundation of society (Cranston, p. 24-25)
• The child enters both a family and a nation. The family's duty being slowly to awaken the child
to virtue. The government must perform its part in the social contract - to preserve the rights
to life and liberty of all the citizens (Deighton, p. 23)
• Each of these communities should be guided by moral laws, laws devised from the laws of
nature which are God's laws (Yolton, p. 20)
THEORY OF OPPORTUNITY
• Who is to be educated? Who is to be schooled?

• The citizens of the nation fall into two kinds: those who posses property to some
significant degree and those who do not. The first group is made up of
gentlemen, the second of workingmen. Both gentlemen and workingmen ought
to be personally happy and socially useful, but since they occupy different
stations in society, their happiness and usefulness must differ. The welfare and
prosperity of the nation demand that children of the propertied class be educated
in a way quite different from children of the poor (Deighton, p. 21).
• Locke believed that the daughters of gentlemen should be education in much the
same way as their sons (Deighton, p. 24) Children of the poor class should be kept
away from schools - even the best - because they would fall into the company of
undesirables (Cranston, p. 17)
THEORY OF CONSENSUS
• Why do people disagree? How is the consensus achieved?

• Whose opinion takes precedence?
• Wrong doing is a sign of ignorance; people should be enlightened, use
own power of reason, be prudent, reflective and calculatory instead
of being moved by impulse (Cranston, p. 24).
• The mind perceives the agreement between our idea and itself, and a
disagreement in this respect between it and all others (for example,
white is white and not black). The mind also perceives a violation
between its ideas. In one sense all the agreements are violations, for
an agreement is a violation. (Aaron, p. 225)
JOHN LOCKE’S PEDAGOGY
• In 1693 John Locke, after writing extensively on topics such as human understanding,
government, money, and toleration, published a book which seemed quite heretical
at the time: Some Thoughts Concerning Education.
• Consider the three key themes which are addressed:
• 1. the development of self-discipline through esteem and disgrace rather than force
or reward;
• 2. the significance of developing a good character; and
• 3. the importance of developing reason in a child by treating the child as a rational
entity. Many of Locke’s ideas are quite humane and consistent with his strong
democratic sentiments. Locke’s belief that the mind is a piece of wax or white paper
which the active educator must keep as still as possible in order to accurately stamp
the information she would have the pupil passively receive.
SELF DISCIPLINE
• “As the strength of the body lies chiefly in being able to endure
hardships, so also does that of the mind.
• And the great principle and foundation of all virtue and worth is placed in
this, that a man is able to deny himself his own desires, cross his own
inclinations, and purely follow what reason directs is best, though the
appetite lean the other way.”
• Locke begins his book by noting that a sound mind in a sound body is
the formula for happiness. The problem is that nature rarely supplies an
individual with both; thus one needs education to acquire both physical
and mental fortitude.
Thoughts Concerning Education, section 34
• The great mistake I have observed in people’s breeding their children

has been, that this has not been taken care enough of its due season;
that the mind has not been made obedient to discipline, and pliant to
reason, when at first it was most tender, most easy to be bowed.
• Locke’s “great principle”, that which allows one to cross one’s inclinations, is self- discipline.
But in order to achieve such discipline one must first be disciplined. parents all too often
err by being too lenient or too strict.
• Either extreme prevents a child from growing up as an adult governed by reason, that is,
an adult marked by self-discipline. For a spoiled child will end up having no mastery over
inclinations and a severely disciplined child will lose the vigorous, self-confident spirit
necessary to amount to something in the world.
• a perfect balance between the two is where the secret of education resides.
• “To avoid the danger that is on either hand is the great art: and he that has found a way to
keep up a child’s spirit, easy, active, and free; and yet, at the same time, to restrain him,
from the many things he has a mind to; and to draw him to the things that are uneasy to
him; he, I say, that knows how to reconcile these seeming contradictions, has, in my
opinion, got the true secret of education.” Some Thoughts Concerning Education, section 46
CONCLUSION
• Locke's writing which most influenced the founding fathers of the United States
Constitution was the idea that the power to govern was obtained from the permission of
the people.
• He thought that the purpose of government was to protect the natural rights of its
citizens.
• He said that natural rights were life, liberty and property, and that all people automatically
earned these simply by being born.
• When a government did not protect those rights, the citizen had the right and maybe even
the obligation of overthrowing the government.
• We can concluded that in order to educate, we must “make room” in the head: the paper
must be clean, the wax must be smooth, the cabinet must be empty. Any thoughts of fear
or frustration will inevitably crowd the space which must receive the sensory data from
without.
7.Rousseau
ANALYSIS OF POLITICAL THEORY OF JEAN JACQUES ROUSSEAU

Jean-Jacques Rousseau
Born
28 June 1712
Geneva, Republic of
Geneva
at 16 left Geneva and
settled in Savoy
Ten years later moved to
Paris
Died 2 July 1778 (aged 66)
Kingdom of France
Era
18th century philosophy
(Modern philosophy)
Jean-Jacques Rousseau
Region Main interests
Western Philosophers Political philosophy, music,
School education, literature,
autobiography
Social contract theory
Romanticism Notable ideas
General will,, moral simplicity of
humanity, child-centered
learning, civil religion, popular
sovereignty, positive liberty
Rousseau
Jean-Jacques Rousseau, known as one of the most influential thinkers during the
18th-century European Enlightenment period, was born on June 28, 1712, in
Geneva, Switzerland.
His first philosophical work, A Discourse on the Arts and Sciences, discussed how
science and arts had caused the corruption of virtue and morality.
In his second essay, Discourse on Inequality he pursue the Idea of nature being lost
through civilization and discuss the origin of inequality and how far it is natural.
Of the social contract is his contribution in which he theorized about the best way
to set up a political community. Rousseau was also a composer and music
theorist.
ROUSSEAU AND THE STATE OF NATURE
Rousseau proclaimed the natural goodness of man and believed that one
man by nature is just as good as any other.
For Rousseau, a man could be just without virtue and good without
effort. According to Rousseau, man in the state of nature was free, wise,
and good and the laws of nature were benevolent.
It follows that it was civilization that enslaved and corrupted man and
made him unnatural. Because in the order of nature all men were equal,
it also follows that distinction and differentiation among men are the
products of culture and civilization. Because man is by nature a saint, it
must be the corrupting influence of society that is responsible for the
misconduct of the individual.
Corruption by Civilization: The Origin of Inequality
The fundamental problem for Rousseau is not nature or man but instead is
social institutions. Rousseau's view is that society corrupts the pure
individual. Arguing that men are not inherently constrained by human
nature, Rousseau claims that men are limited and corrupted by social
arrangements. Conceiving of freedom as an absolute, independent of any
natural limitations, Rousseau disavows the world of nature and its inherent
laws, constraints, and regulations.
Rousseau assigned primacy to instinct, emotion, intuition, feelings, and
passion. He believed that these could provide better insights into what is
good and real than reason. Rousseau thus minimized reason and differences
in the moral worth of individuals. He failed to realize that freedom is
meaningless in the absence of reason. He did not grasp that reason connects
the moral subject to the world of values.
Continuation on origin of
inequality
Rousseau observed that although life was peaceful in the state of nature, people
were unfulfilled. They needed to interact in order to find actualization.
Evil, greed, and selfishness emerged as human society began to develop. As

people formed social institutions, they developed vices. One such foundation
was private property that encouraged greed and self-interest.
Rousseau thought private property to be the source of social ills. He considered

that private ownership of property tend to corrupt men and destroy their
character. Although he did not actually support the abolition of private property,
he believed that private property should be minimal and should be distributed
equally among the members of the society.
SOCIAL CONTRACT THEORY
In political philosophy the social contract or political contract is a theory or
model, originating during the Age of Enlightenment, that typically addresses
the questions of the origin of society and the legitimacy of the authority of
the state over the individual.
Social contract arguments typically posit that individuals have consented,
either explicitly or tacitly, to surrender some of their freedoms and submit
to the authority of the ruler or magistrate (or to the decision of a majority),
in exchange for protection of their remaining rights.
The question of the relation between natural and legal rights, therefore, is
often an aspect of social contract theory.
GENERAL WILL
The idea of the general will is at the heart of Rousseau's philosophy.
The general will is not the will of the majority. Rather, it is the will of the
political organism that he sees as an entity with a life of its own.
The general will is an additional will, somehow distinct from and other
than any individual will or group of individual wills. The general will is, by
some means, endowed with goodness and wisdom surpassing the
beneficence and wisdom of any person or collection of persons. Society
is coordinated and unified by the general will.
G.W
Rousseau believed that this general will actually exist and that it demands the unqualified
obedience of every individual.
He held that there is only one general will and, consequently, only one supreme good
and a single overriding goal toward which a community must aim. The general will is
always a force of the good and the just. It is independent, totally sovereign, infallible, and
inviolable.
The result is that all powers, persons, and their rights are under the control and direction
of the entire community. This means that no one can do anything without the consent of
all.
Everyone is totally dependent on everybody for all aspects of their lives. Such universal
dependency eliminates the possibility of independent individual achievement
G.W
All power is transferred to a central authority or sovereign that is the total
community. Major decisions are made by a vote by all in what Rousseau calls a
plebiscite that is something like a town meeting without the benefit of debate.
A legislator proposes laws but does not decide on them. The legislator is a person
or an intellectual elite body that works out carefully worded alternatives, brings
people together, and has people vote with the results binding on all.
The authority of the legislator derives from his superior insight, charisma, virtue,
and mysticism. The legislator words the propositions of the plebiscite so that the
"right" decision will result. The right decisions are those that change human
nature. The unlimited power of the state is made to appear legitimate by the
apparent consent of the majority.
G.W
Rousseau was an advocate of the ancient idea of the omnipotence of the
lawgiver. Rulers are in some way attuned to the dictates of the general will and
able to incorporate these dictates into specific laws.
No one can challenge these laws because their source is the wise and beneficent
general will.
Rousseau permits no disobedience of the general will once its decisions have
been made. Man's will must be subordinated and he must abide by the general
will even though he thinks he disagrees with it. The person who "disagrees"
with the general will must be mistaken.
G.W
According to Rousseau, each person wants to be good and therefore would want to obey the
general will.
It follows that when a person disagrees with the general will, he would actually be acting contrary
to his own basic desires and that it would be proper to use force to attain his agreement with the
general will.
The general will reflects the real will of each member of society. By definition, the general will is
always right. The general will is the overriding good to which each person is willing to sacrifice all
other goods, including all particular private wills.
The "good citizen" assigns to society's laws a goodness and wisdom exceeding his own goodness
and wisdom. It is therefore quite possible to have a conflict between what a person thinks that he
wills and that which he truly wills. The good citizen is able to identify his own will with the general
will.
EDUCATION
Rousseau maintained that the state must control all schooling because
the objective of schooling is to develop citizens who want only what the
community (i.e., the general will) wants.
Because mankind was infinitely perfectible, human failings could be

eradicated by education.
JEAN-JACGUES ROUSSEAU AND THE ORIGIN OF
AUTONOMOMY
The concept of autonomy according to him is a self-

legislation involves citizens joining together to make laws
for themselves that reflect their collective understanding
of the common good. The four features of autonomy are:
Autonomy is a type of freedom, is introduced into modern
philosophy in order to make up for a perceived deficiency,
or incompleteness is merely negative freedom(the right to
do as one pleases, unimpeded by others).
Autonomy is taken to be not merely a compliment of
negative freedom but a higher, more valuable species of
freedom.
Rousseau’s reason for introducing new conception of
freedom (in the form of autonomy). For those instances
where the law prohibits me from acting as I desire, my will
is constrained by something external to it and I am
therefore unfree unless the laws that limit my actions also
come from me (which is to say: Unless I am in some sense
the author of the laws that constrain me). In that case, I
would still be constrained but not by anything external to
me. In obeying law that came from me, I would ultimately
be obeying only myself, and this obeying only myself is for
Rousseau the essence of freedom in all its forms.
8.Kant
Immanuel Kant’s Moral Philosophy

Why study Philosophy
 Love of knowledge
 Love of the processes through which knowledge
is arrived at
 Capacity of critical enquiry
 Way of life – Mantra to lead life
Biographical Sketch
1
3
Why study Kant?
 Rationality
 Duty
 Moral Life
 Freedom and Individual Rights (American Revolution
– Thomas Paine)
 Justice (John Rawls)
 Liberal values (Libertarianism vs Communitarianism)
 Republicanism - Democracy
 Multiculturalism(Individual Rights and Group
Rights) What happens to culture based rights in the
emphasis on individual rights?
Kant and his times
 Middle Ages
 Renaissance
 Enlightenment
 The political philosophy of the enlightenment is
the unambiguous antecedent of modern Western
liberalism:
 Secular
 Pluralistic
 Rule-of-law-based
 Emphasis on individual rights and freedoms
 Kant’s essay “What is Enlightenment”
1
3
Kant and his times What is
Enlightenment
 Enlightenment is man's release from his self-incurred tutelage.
 Tutelage is man's inability to make use of his
understanding without direction from another.
 Sapere aude! "Have courage to use your own reason!"-
that is the motto of enlightenment.
 Through laziness and cowardice a large part of mankind, even
after nature has freed them from alien guidance, gladly remain
immature
 For this enlightenment, however, nothing is required but freedom,
and indeed the most harmless among all the things to which this
term can properly be applied. It is the freedom to make public
use of one's reason at every point.
"Do we now live in an en© lSigudhhatnesnhueDdharaMgshiear?"Thtuhsredaya, Anpslwir 31e, 2r01i7s,
"No ," but we do live in an age of enlightenment.
Kant’s Classification of Knowledge
Rational
Knowledge
Material Formal
Laws of Laws of
Logic
Nature(Physics) Freedom(Ethic)
Natural Moral
Philosophy Philosophy
Kant’s Epistemology
 What exactly is knowledge?
 How is it arrived at?
 What are the processes involved?
 Who serves as a faculty of knowledge?
 If knowledge is taken as the given then what is it exactly
that we have knowledge of ?
 I have therefore found it necessary to deny knowledge
in
order to make room for faith.
 I have no knowledge of myself as I am, but merely as I
appear to myself.
 Thoughts without content are empty, intuitions
without concepts are blind.
 The senses do not err — not because they always judge
rightly, but because they do not judge at all.
Kant’s Moral Law
Reason
Good Will
Duty
Reverence for the

Moral Law
Self-legislation,
Autonomy, Freedom
Categorical
Imperative
137
Kant’s Moral Law

 What is reason?
 What is the good will?
 What is the relationship between good will and reason?
 What is it that pushes the good will to act?
 Sense of DUTY actualized though the UNIVERSAL LAW which
further is based on the CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE
 What propels or rather further propels an individual to follow
this path or perform duty just for duty’s sake? REVERENCE
 Why should anyone have reverence for such a law?
SELF LEGISLATION, UNIVERSALITY
 What is the moral law?
 Why is it that we should be following the moral law?
 What is the incentive or what is the force propelling us
to
follow it?
 Why are we motivated to act according to this moral law?
Kant’s Moral Law
Reason
 Reason in a creature is a faculty of widening the rules
and purposes of the use of all its powers far beyond
natural instinct; it acknowledges no limits to its projects.
Reason itself does not work instinctively, but requires
trial, practice, and instruction in order gradually to
progress from one level of insight to another.
 Nature has willed that man should, by himself, produce
everything that goes beyond the mechanical ordering of
his animal existence, and that he should partake of no
other happiness or perfection than that which he himself,
independently of instinct, has created by his own reason.
 Reason creates for itself the idea of a spontaneity that
can, on its own, start to act–without, i.e., needing to be
preceded by another cause by means of which it is
determined to action in turn, according to the law of
33causal connection © Sudhanshu Dhar Mishra Thursday, April 13,
2017
139
Kant’s Moral Law
Good Will
 It is impossible to conceive anything at all in the
world, or even out of it, which can be taken as good
without qualification, except a good will
 The very coolness of a scoundrel makes him not
merely more dangerous but also immediately more
abominable in our eyes than we should have taken
him to be without it
 The good will is the only thing “good without
limitation” (ohne Einschränkung)
 It would shine like a jewel for itself, as something
having its full worth in itself
140
Kant’s Moral Law
Duty
 A human action is morally good, not because it is done from
immediate inclination still less because it is done from self-interest
but because it is done for the sake of duty
 Duty is the practical unconditional necessity of action
 In speaking of actions done from duty, Kant says the will is at a
crossroads, as it were, between its principle a priori, which is formal,
and its incentive a posteriori, which is material
 Reason vs Passion
 Motive behind duty – happiness, sympathy, love, affection
 Gladly I serve my friends, but alas I do so with pleasure.
 Hence I am plagued with doubt that I am not a virtuous person.
To this the answer is given:
 Surely your only resource is to try to despise them entirely,
 And then with aversion do what your duty enjoins you.
 Duty for duty’s sake
 Shopkeeper example
141
Kant’s Moral Law
Duty for duty’s sake
 An action done from duty has its moral worth, not
from the results it attains or seeks to attain, but from
a formal principle or maxim – the principle of doing
one’s duty whatever that duty may be
 Comparison with Gita
142
Kant’s Moral Law

 What is the moral law all about?
 According to Kant nature and every thing that it
constitutes functions according to a law and the
same applies to will which acts in accordance with its
idea of a moral law – the supreme principle of
morality
 Nature does nothing in vain, and in the use of means
to her goals she is not prodigal. Her giving to man
reason and the freedom of the will which depends
upon it is clear indication of her purpose. Man
accordingly was not to be guided by instinct, not
nurtured and instructed with ready-made knowledge;
rather, he should bring forth everything out of his
own resources.
143
Kant’s Moral Law Form of
the Moral Law
 An idea of reason
 Applies to all reasonable and rational beings
 Universal
 Necessary
 Objective
 Non-contradictory
144
Take away from Kant

 Respecting the individual – Man is the measure of all things
 Should your action be driven by the result it aims at or the
intrinsic worth of the same?
 Should you be driven by, say recognition, when you opt for a
particular profile or because you like the profile?
 Should you lead your life in a particular way because you are
concerned about what other’s will say about the way you lead
your life?
 Should you chose honesty? Why?
 Without fear or favour
 Should you think of levels of life or levels of being finally
dictating your pursuit in life?
 Can the centre of happiness lie within you and is that in the
ultimate sense being autonomous? (Aatm Deepo Bhav, Aham
Brahmasmi)
9.John Stuart Mill
10.Bentham
The Utilitarian's
Pain/Pleasure
Individualism
On Liberty
Social Reforms
Women rights
11.Hegel
Who was Hegel?
• Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel was born in Stuttgart, Germany, in
1770.Hegel worked as a professor in various German universities,
where he became well acquainted with Romanticism, to which his
‘Hegelianism’ would largely be a response.While Hegel was at the
various universities, he worked alongside minds such as Schelling, and
got a thorough background in theology and philosophy.
• He was especially influenced by Kant, whose attempt at reconciling
the two schools of thought on the nature of reality left an impression
on Hegel. Hegel’s most important work as a professor was The
Phenomenology of Spirit, which we’ll talk about later.
Descartes, Kant, Romanticism
• Along with J. G. Fichte and F. W. J. von Schelling, Hegel (1770–1831) belongs to the period of “German
idealism” in the decades following Kant. The most systematic of the post-Kantian idealists, Hegel attempted,
throughout his published writings as well as in his lectures, to elaborate a comprehensive and systematic
ontology from a “logical” starting point. He is perhaps most well-known for his teleological account of history,
an account which was later taken over by Marx and “inverted” into a materialist theory of an historical
development culminating in communism. For most of the twentieth century, the “logical” side of Hegel's
thought had been largely forgotten, but his political and social philosophy continued to find interest and
support. However, since the 1970s, a degree of more general philosophical interest in Hegel's systematic
thought has also been revived.Who was Hegel?Hegel’s work is normally categorized as German idealism, and
he is considered specifically to be an absolute idealist.Hegel was influenced by Immanuel Kant, and Hegel’s
work in the philosophy of history would influence Karl Marx.Like the earlier philosophers, Hegel tried to keep
his philosophy systematic, with a logical “starting point” (the way Descartes did with cogito, ergo sum).While
Hegel’s work is considered part of German idealism, a philosophical movement that included the important
German thinkers of the time, he is really the creator of absolute idealism, which basically states that all of
existence is united in one identity. That’s complicated, but we’ll get to it later. Hegel’s work synthesized most
of the thinking of his time, and went on to influence mostly social and political philosophers and
existentialists.Hegel’s InfluenceDescartes, Kant, RomanticismHegelMarx, Nietzsche, Sartre
Absolute Idealism
• Hegel is considered the creator of the school of thought called absolute
idealism.Some background: Kant’s transcendental idealism and Berkeley’s
subjective idealism state that reality is essentially based on perception. Hegel
disagreed, and published this alternate theory.Absolute idealism describes how
being is an all-inclusive whole.This means that since the subject (a thinking
being) can know an object (the world), there must be some sort of identity that
connects the two, or else there would be no certain way of knowing
anything.Absolute idealism means that for me to know you, there has to be
some sort of identity that connects us. That identity is called the “world spirit,”
which we’ll get to in a minute. Hegel made clear that thinking and being were
not the same, however, and so he came up with an entirely new system to
describe this absolute idealism. This new system is called the dialectic process.
The “World Spirit”
• To the Romantics, the “world spirit” was the term they used for the deepest
meaning of life.In Hegel’s work, the “world spirit” (Weltgeist) is reason
itself.Hegel believed that the “world spirit” is continuously expanding toward
knowledge of itself.The “world spirit” comes to know itself in three stages:
the subjective spirit (the individual), the objective spirit (the family, society,
and state), and the absolute spirit (art, religion, and philosophy).When Hegel
defines the world spirit as reason, he also defines reason as the sum of all
human utterances. What does that mean? It means reason is the sum of all
human thought, culture, and art. That equals the “world spirit” because only
man has a spirit. This also means that he believed all knowledge was human
knowledge, which means that there is not any absolute truth beyond human
reason. That’s very different from previous beliefs about truth.
The Dialectic Process Not Dialectic
Dialectic
• Synthesis: Blue
• Antithesis: Yellow
• Synthesis: Green
• Dialectic
• Synthesis: Blue Baby Blue
• Antithesis: Yellow
• Pale Yellow
• Synthesis: Mint Green
• To Hegel, the dialectic process is an observed historical phenomenon – not a
“prediction” – in which the best of two opposing points of view are “sublated,” or
combined.
The Dialectic Process
• First, someone puts forth a claim: this is called a thesis.Then,
someone else puts forth a contradictory claim: an antithesis.A third
party forms a synthesis, which accommodates the best of both points
of view.Hegel’s favorite example was that the thesis of being and the
antithesis of non-being, or nothing, was resolved in the synthesis of
becoming.The dialectic process is the name Hegel gives to the
historical chain of reflections that makes up the development of the
awareness of the “world spirit.”
Hegel’s Philosophy of History
• His philosophy was mostly a method for understanding history.He believed that
philosophers, and all thinkers, could not be considered outside their historical
context.The reason he stressed this is because his belief on truth was that since the basis
of human understanding changes from one generation to the next, there is no eternal
truth, but rather right and wrong relate to a certain historical context.In fact, to Hegel,
“truth” was that same process of history – in a sense.So recap on Hegel and history: he
believed history was the story of the “world spirit” – human reason, consciousness –
coming to knowledge of itself, and that this was done through the dialectic process. He
emphasized that all truth is of the moment, that things are right and wrong in a
particular historical context, but not necessarily forever. This is somewhere in between
subjective truth – the truth is up to the individual – and objective truth – there is one
eternal truth. Hegel doesn’t focus on truth, but on reason, which manifests itself in
history. That is why Hegel equates truth and history: to him, they are two ways of
describing the same thing, reason, the ultimate reality.
“Truth” in Hegel “Truth” is not an objective entity.
• “Truth” is also not subjective in the sense that it is “up to” the
individual.Truth is an evolving reality that develops in the same way
that the “world spirit” does, but toward full truth rather than toward
full knowledge of itself.So “truth” isn’t really a thing of the moment;
rather it’s a sort of living, growing being that develops alongside
history and humanity.
Hegel
• Absolute idealism states that being is an all-inclusive whole, making it
possible for a subject to know an object.The “world spirit”, or human
reason, is in the process of coming to know itself, which is history.This
process is called the dialectic process, which consists of a thesis, an
antithesis, and a synthesis.Since actions can be right or wrong in a
given historical context, there is no eternal truth, but rather truth
develops alongside the historical process.
Link
https://www.slideshare.net/AmaniSami1/georg-wilhelm-friedrich-
hegel-75840149
12.

Western Political Thought

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Western Political Thought

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Western Political Thought

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Western Political Thought

“for a man who wishes to profess goodness

Understanding the Principles of Government and law of Baron de

Montesquieu’s book, On the Spirit of Laws, published in

• All men are created equal

• We are obligated to transfer our natural liberties to our rights.

• His theory understood the citizen were to establish their own

• What is a human being?

• What is learning? How are skills and knowledge acquired?

• Who is to teach? By what methods? What will the curriculum be?

• Who is to be educated? Who is to be schooled?

• Why do people disagree? How is the consensus achieved?

• The great mistake I have observed in people’s breeding their children

ANALYSIS OF POLITICAL THEORY OF JEAN JACQUES ROUSSEAU

Evil, greed, and selfishness emerged as human society began to develop. As

Rousseau thought private property to be the source of social ills. He considered

Because mankind was infinitely perfectible, human failings could be

The concept of autonomy according to him is a self-

Immanuel Kant’s Moral Philosophy

Reverence for the

Kant’s Moral Law

Kant’s Moral Law

Take away from Kant

You might also like