POS 341 Modern Political Theory
Spring 2005
Dr Simhony
Office: Lattie Coor Hall, 6762
Phone: 965-727 8189
E-mail: simhony@asu.edu
Office hours: Tuesday & Thursday: 9:00-10:00, Thursday: 3:00-4:00, and by appointment.
TA: Mr Jason Rudloff
Office: Lattie Coor Hall, 6779 CB
Office hours:
E-mail: Jason.Rudloff@asu.edu
Course Description
The course focuses on thinkers that have not lost their relevance. We shall explore their theories of the good society which they formulate by looking at the sort of problem/s each thinker seeks to solve. As well we shall we shall attend to certain recurring themes such as the idea of freedom, the nature of allegiance we owe the state, and questions such as: do we have rights against the state? What is a just state? Is private property essential to individual liberty? Do laws enhance or threaten liberty?
Required Texts
Required reading appears in the weekly assigned reading. The required books are available at ASU bookstore.
1. David Wootton, ed., Modern Political Thought. Reading from Machiavelli to Nietzsche (Hackett, 1996)
2. George Klosko, History of Political Theory. An Introduction. Volume 2: Modern Political Theory (Harcourt, 1995).
3. Montesquieu, The Spirit of the Laws, books 11-12 (pp. 154-168, 187-200) and The Persian Letters, in Melvin Richter, ed., The political theory of Montesquieu, pp. 111-141.
Please note: Montesquieu reading is on Reserve, Hayden Library.
Course Requirements
(1) Students are expected to bring the required texts to class.
(2) Exams. Your final grade is based on four (4) exams – three during the semester and a cumulative final exam: February 17 (Thursday), March 31 (Thursday), May 3 (Tuesday), and May 6, Friday, 10-11:50. It is a necessary condition for passing the course that students take all of the four exams. Each of the three mid-term exam is preceded by a review session – February 15, March 29, and April 28, respectively – which students are required to attend. The three mid-term exams will consist of some combination of multiple- choice, matching, true-false and either short-answer questions or essay questions. The final exam will have all the preceding except for short-answer or essay questions.
Please note: The exams will cover both the primary sources (Wootton) and the secondary source (Klosko). The questions on the syllabus form the basis of the exams. See also (4)Class structure and participation.
Basis for final grade:
First exam 20%
Second exam 25%
Third exam 25%
Final exam 30%
In assigning grades to the for the course, the instructor will follow a scale that is similar to, but less stringent than, the traditional scale of 90% and above =A, 80-89% = B, 70-79% = C, and 60-69% = D. There will be no “curving” of grades in the strict sense of the word.
Final grades will be based don the following scale:
A+ = 97-100 B+ = 84-87 C+ = 72-75
A = 91-96 B = 78-83 C = 62-71
A- = 88-90 B- = 75-77
(3) Class structure and participation .
Each class will consist of both lecture and class discussion. The lecture will not cover fully the reading from Klosko. Rather, the point is to add and complement his interpretation. Class discussion will focus mainly on the questions pertaining to the primary sources (Wootton). The questions on the reading from Klosko aim to focus your attention on some important issues he discusses. Both sets of question form the basis for the exams.
Students are expected to come to class fully prepared for the particular session's topic. This means that students will be expected to have done the reading for the relevant topic and be able to answer--and indeed may be called upon to answer--the questions which the syllabus assigns. The best way to prepare is to write brief answers to the questions. Class participation will not count directly as part of your grade. However, those who take a regular and effective part in class discussions will be rewarded at the end of the semester if their scores places them on the borderline between one grade and another.
(4) Honors students taking the course for credit are expected to write a paper as an extra honors assignment. You must submit a one-page proposal that explains how it relates to either a thinker or an issue we discuss and which exam you wish your paper to replace. The proposal should be submitted not later than February 22. I strongly encourage you to discuss your topic with me before you submit your proposal. A complete draft of the paper is due by April 5, and the final paper, by on April 28. The paper should be 8-10 pages, double-spaced, typed, and paginated.
Rules and Policies
(1) No extra credit work is available.
(2) Anyone caught cheating--which includes plagiarism or the passing off of someone else's work as one's own--automatically fails the particular assignment, that is receives zero.
(3) ASU rules allows for a grade of incomplete (“I”) only in cases of dire circumstances.
(4) Make-up exams will be given only to those who either (i) receive the instructor’s permission before a scheduled exam or (ii) provide a written medical excuse, or (iii) give evidence of some other emergency.
(5) Civility in the classroom. Students are expected to come to class on time, not leave before the end of class, fulfil their “nutritional” requirements outside the class period, and turn off their cell phones. Listening to the instructor as well as to fellow students is a way of practicing mutual respect.
(6) Course Blackboard. Grades will be posted on the blackboard as well as announcements and other relevant information. Please make sure you check the Blackboard frequently.
(7) February 17 is unrestricted course & complete withdrawal deadline (in person). Restricted course withdrawal deadline is on April 1.
Please note: Mr. Jason Rudloff – who is much more accomplished than I am in all things considered – is the course manager. Please talk to him (or email him) first about any concern or problem you have.
A word to the wise:
First and foremost to do well on the exams you need to attend classes regularly and be well prepared. Be bold and ask questions either to clarify issues discussed or to advance the discussion and therefore your and other students’ understanding.
Second, take advantage of the tutors available to this class. They are students who took the class before and did exceedingly well. They will have either weekly “office hours” or conduct small classes. The aim is to go over issues discussed in class and/or help students prepare for class. The tutors will be introduced to class early on. I urge you to contact them. Their office hours will be posted on the course blackboard. In addition, you may always talk to the TA or me; or all of us.
Thirdly, do not wait for the last moment to tell the instructor or the TA that you are failing the class. It will be too late. If you do poorly on the first exam, or are not satisfied with your grade, seek assistance immediately. Bottom line: take responsibility for your learning in this course. If you do, you will find that a great deal of support is available to you.
SCHEDULE OF TOPICS
Week 1
January 18, Tuesday Procedural introduction
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
January 20, Thursday Substantive introduction
******************************************************************************
Week 2
January 25, Tuesday Machiavelli
Reading:
1. Wootton, The Prince, chaps. 15-26 (pp. 36-57).
2. Klosko, chap. 1, pp. 1-21.
Questions:
1. Wootton. The Prince (1) Are there any qualities that a good (powerful) ruler must actually have? (2) How can a ruler make sure that his luck would never change?
1. Klosko (1) In what does Machiavelli’s great originality lie? What does it have to do with instrumental rationality? (2) What is Machiavelli’s message, according to Berlin? (3) What is virtu`?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
January 27, Thursday Machiavelli
Reading:
1. Wootton, Discourses, pp. 65-6, 68-69, 75-81, 84-7.
2. Klosko, chap. 1, pp. 21-33.
Questions:
1. Wootton, (1) “I maintain those who criticize the clashes between the nobility and the populace attack what was, I argue, the primary factor making Rome’s continuing freedom”. Why? (2) What’s wrong with “gentlemen”? (3) What conditions are necessary in order for republics to maintain political freedom?
2. Klosko (1) Are the Discourses inconsistent with The Prince? (2) What’s wrong with corruption? How could we overcome it? (3) Why is civic virtue important?
******************************************************************************
Week 3
February 1, Tuesday Hobbes
Reading:
1. Wootton, chaps. 13-14 (pp. 169-177), chaps. 16-19 (pp. 184-199).
2. Klosko, chap. 2, pp. 37-64.
Questions:
1. Wootton (1) Why is the state of nature a state of war? (2) “ ... there be some rights, which no man can be understood by any words, or other signs, to have abandoned, or transferred”. What are they? (Another version of the same question is: What covenants are always void?) (3) What powers does Hobbes give the sovereign to make him absolute?
2. Klosko (1) How do Hobbes’s natural law differ from traditional natural laws? Why does Hobbes alter the traditional understanding of natural laws? (2) Why does Hobbes’s view of social contract depart from traditional social contract? What is the nature of the departure?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
February 3, Thursday Hobbes
Reading:
1. Wootton, chap. 21 (pp. 204-209), chap. 26 (pp. 226-236), A review and conclusion (pp. 297-302).
2. Klosko, chap. 2, pp. 71-88.
Questions:
1. Wootton: (1) What, if any, of “his own former natural liberty” does the individual have under the sovereign? (2) “As for other liberties, they depend on the silence of the law”. What does Hobbes mean? What other liberties? (3) Can the sovereign rightly require his subjects to fight for their country?
2. Klasko: (1) How does Hobbes balance, if at all, security and civil liberty? (2) Is Hobbes a liberal?
******************************************************************************
Week 4
February 8, Tuesday Locke
Reading:
1. Wootton: Sects. 4-51 (pp. 312-327).
2. Klosko: chap. 3, pp. 92-107, 115-123.
Questions:
1. Wootton: (1) Why do people quit the state of nature? (2) To what extent, if at all, does Locke agree with Filmer’s following view of freedom: “a liberty for everyone to do what he lists, to live as he pleases, and not to be tied by any laws”? Why? (3) Why does Locke insist that “...the property of labour should be able to over-balance the community of land”?
2. Klosko: (1) To what extent, if at all, is Locke’s state of nature similar to Hobbes’s? (2) How does Locke justify inequality in property given that he defends equal rights in the state of nature? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
February 10, Thursday Locke
Reading:
1. Wootton, Sects. 77-101 (pp. 334-342), sects. 112-131 (pp. 346-351), sects. 169-174 (pp. 363-365, sects. 197-230 (pp. 371-381).
2. Klosko, chap. 3, pp. 107-115, 123-133.
Questions:
1. Wootton: (1) “This is to think, that men are so foolish, that they take care to avoid what mischief may be done them by pole cats, or foxes; but are content, nay think it safely, to be devoured by lions.” What’s Locke’s point? Who are the lions? (2) To what extent, if at all, “submitting to the laws of any country, living quietly, and enjoying privileges and protection under them” makes a person a member of that society? Why?
2. Klosko: (1) Why does Locke have to rely on “tacit consent”? What’s the problem with it? (2) Why is Locke’s position on resistance radical? (3) Under what circumstances is resistance to government justified?
******************************************************************************
Week 5
February 15, Tuesday Catching up & Review
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
February 17, Thursday 1st in-class exam
******************************************************************************
Week 6
February 22, Tuesday Hume
Reading:
1. Wootton: pp. 387-396.
2. Klosko: chap. 4.
Questions:
1. Wootton: (1) “The doctrine, which founds all lawful government on an original contract, or consent of the people, is plainly of this kind,” that is, erroneous. Why? (2) “The obligation to allegiance being of like force and authority with the obligation to fidelity, we gain nothing by resolving the one into the other”. What is Hume talking about? (3) What is the general obligation which binds us to government?
2. Klosko: (1) In what way does Hume’s account of justice depend on a basic distinction between the immediate interests of particular people and the interests of society as a whole? (2) Why does Hume speak of the circumstances of justice?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
February 24, Thursday Montesquieu
Reading:
1. Montesquieu: The Spirits of the Laws, Books 11 and 12, pp. 154-168, 187-200
2. Klosko: chap. 5, pp. 182-211.
Questions:
1. Montesquieu: (1) “Political liberty is found only in moderate government”. Why? What does he mean by “moderate government”? (2) “ ... the citizen’s liberty depends principally on the goodness of the criminal laws”. In what specific way is this the case?
2. Klosko: (1) What are Montesquieu’s three types of government? What is the basis for his classification? (2) How does Montesquieu understand liberty? (3) Do laws secure liberty or threaten it?
******************************************************************************
Week 7
March 1, Tuesday Montesquieu
Reading:
1. Montesquieu: The Persian Letters. pp. 113-139.
2. Klosko: chap. 5, pp. 176-182.
Questions:
1. Montesquieu: (1) Why do the Troglodytes perish (when we first meet them)? Why do they prosper later on? Why are they denounced by the first king elected by them? (2) Is the seraglio system governed by love? fear? despotism? reciprocity?
2. Klosko: (1) What’s the point of The Persian Letters? Why the form of letters?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
March 3, Thursday Rousseau
Reading:
1. Wootton: “Discourse on the Origin and Foundations of Inequality among Men,” pp. 410-413, 425 (“Whatever these origins may be,”- 448.
2. Klosko: chap. 6, pp. 212-230.
Questions:
1. Wootton: (1) “... pity is a natural sentiment”. What role does it play? How does it contrast with reason? (2) Why does Rousseau speak of “the mask of benevolence”? (3) Why does Rousseau described “civilized man” as “artificial man”? Why is “civilized man” in a condition of “tranquil subjection”?
2. Klosko: (1) What is Rousseau’s view of “natural man”? How does he differ from other animals? (2) In what ways does Rousseau’s state of nature differ from Hobbes’s and Locke’s?
******************************************************************************
Week 8
March 8, Tuesday Rousseau
Reading:
1. Wootton: Social Contract, pp. 465-473, 474-489, 510-512, 514-518, 528-534.
2. Klosko: chap. 6, pp. 230-248.
Questions:
1. Wootton: (1) How does social contract (compact) ensure equality? (2) “This passage from the state of nature to the civil state produces quite a remarkable change in man ...” What is the change? (2) “There is often a great deal of difference between the will of all and the general will”. What is the difference? (3) Does the will of the majority express the general will?
2. Klosko: (1) Why does Rousseau criticize negative freedom? (2) What conception of freedom does he defend?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
March 10, Thursday Rousseau
Reading:
1. Wootton: pp. 510-517, 528-534.
2. Klosko: pp. 249-265.
Questions:
1. Wootton: (1) “ ... the moment a people gives itself representatives, it is no longer free”. Why? (2) In deliberating legislation, what sort of question should we avoid and what sort of question should we ask in order to obtain the general will? Why? (3) “Aside from this primitive contract, the vote of the majority always obligates all the others. ... But it is asked how a man can be both free and forced to conform to wills that are not his own. How can the opponents be both free and be placed in subjection to laws to which they have not consented?” What’s Rousseau’s reply? Does Klosko find it satisfactory?
2. Klosko: (1) How does Rousseau’s treatment of women contradict major themes of his political theory? (2) What’s Rousseau’s most significant contribution to totalitarianism, according to Klosko? To what extent, if at all, does Klosko accept Talmon’s totalitarian criticism of Rousseau? (3) How can we, if at all, make the general will less problematic?
******************************************************************************
Week 9 Spring break
******************************************************************************
Week 10
March 22, Tuesday Burke
Reading:
1. Wootton: pp. 551-563 (“... as it is now violent ...”).
2. Klosko: chap. 7, pp. 266-278, 292-302.
Questions:
1. Wootton: (1) Why does Burke love “regulated liberty”? (2) “To be attached to the subdivision, to love the little platoon we belong to in society, is the first principle ... of public affections.” Why? What does it mean? (3) “Those who attempt to level, never equalize.” Why?
2. Klosko: (1) Why do conservatives distrust reason? What do they trust? (2) What is the role of “natural aristocracy”? (3) Why does Burke defend “prejudice”? “prescription”?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
March 24, Thursday Burke
Reading:
1. Wootton: pp. 563 (“Far am I from denying ...”)-572.
2. Klosko: chap. 7, pp. 278-392, 302-309.
Questions:
1. Wootton: (1) “The rights of man are in a sort of middle, incapable of definition, but not impossible to be discerned”. Why? (2) Our civilization and all the good things which are connected with it “depended for ages upon two principles ...” What are they and why?
2. Klosko: (1) What is “Burkean representation”? What view of politics does it presuppose?
(2) Is there a contradiction between Burke’s rejection of the French Revolution and his support of the American Revolution? (3) Why does Burke contrast abstract (metaphysical) and concrete (real) rights?
******************************************************************************
Week 11
March 29, Tuesday Catching up & Review
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
March 31, Thursday 2nd in-class exam
******************************************************************************
Week 12
April 5, Tuesday Bentham
Reading:
1. Wootton: pp. 585-591.
2. Klosko: chap. 8, pp. 314-326, 330-337.
Questions:
1. Wootton: (1) “It is in vain to talk of the interest of the community, without understanding what is the interest of the individual.” Why? What is the interest of the individual?
2. Klosko: (1) Why does Bentham reject natural rights? What rights does he defend? (2) How does Bentham’s utilitarian defense of democracy differ from natural rights defense of democracy? (3) What’s the problem with Bentham’s rejection of the concept of rights?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
April 7, Thursday Mill
Reading:
1. Wootton: On Liberty, pp. chap.1, pp. 610 (“The object of this essay”)-613, chap.2, pp.635 (“We have now recognized”)-636, chap. 3, pp. 636-647, chap. 4, pp. 648-659, chap. 5, pp. 664 (“It was pointed out”)-672.
2. Klosko: chap. 8, pp. 342-355, 361-2.
Questions:
1. Wootton: (1) What is “the appropriate region of human liberty”? (2) What are the two conditions necessary for human development? (3) “It would be a great misunderstanding of this doctrine to suppose that it is one of selfish indifference, which pretends that human being ... should not concern themselves about the well-doing or well-being of one another ...” Why? What shape does this concern take? (4) Why does he object to “government interference, when it is not such as to involve infringement of liberty”?
2. Klosko: (1) How does Mill defend negative freedom? (2) In what ways does Mill depart from classical liberalism?
******************************************************************************
Week 13
April 12, Tuesday Mill
Reading:
1. Wootton: The Subjection of Women, pp. 673-682 (“and must necessarily disappear”), 688 (“I have dwelt”)-692 (“England free a wife from her tormentor”), 695 (“”But how, it will be asked”)-699 (“depraved state of human mind”), 703 (“It will perhaps be sufficient”)-706 (“”have they been found adequate”), 719 (“There remains a question”)-723 (“of all subsequent times”), 729 (“What marriage may be”)-733.
2. Klosko: chap. 8, pp. 362-367.
Questions:
1. Wootton: (1) “ ...the inequality of rights between men and women has no other source than the law of the strongest”. Why? (2) How should women be liberated? (3) What are the beneficial consequences of liberating women, for themselves and for society as a whole?
April 14, Thursday Hegel
Reading:
1. Wootton: sects. 240-258 (pp. 745-754).
1. Klosko: chap. 9, pp. 371-390.
Questions:
1. Wootton: (1) How does Hegel propose to solve the problem of poverty? (2) “The family is the first ethical root of the state; the corporation is the second”. What is the ethical nature of the corporation? (3) Why should we not confuse the state with civil society? What does it mean to confuse them?
2. Klosko: (1) In what ways does Hegelian freedom depart from and criticize negative freedom? (2) How does his conception of the state go beyond the liberal conception? (3) In what ways does Hegel’s view of the social individual stand in sharp opposition to major currents in liberal political theory?
******************************************************************************
Week 14
April 19, Tuesday Hegel
Reading:
1. Klosko: chap. 9, pp. 390-409.
Questions:
1. Klosko. (1) How does Hegel’s philosophy of history connect with freedom? (2) Is Hegel a totalitarian thinker?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
April 21, Thursday Marx
Reading:
1. Wootton: “The Communist Manifesto”, pp. 826-839.
2. Klosko: chap. 10, pp. 413-415, 423-435.
Questions:
1. Wootton: (1) “The bourgeoisie, historically, has played a most revolutionary part.” In what ways? (2) What’s Marx response to the criticism that “We communists” desire the abolition of the right of private property? (3) When “class distinctions have disappeared ... the public power will lose its political character”. Why?
2. Klosko: (1) What is the role of economics in Marx’s analysis of society, its development, and functioning? (2) Why and when will the state wither away?
******************************************************************************
Week 15
April 26, Tuesday Marx
Reading:
1. Wootton: “The Jewish Question,” pp. 773 “According to Bauer”)-778; “Alienated Labor,”
pp. 790-797.
2. Klosko: chap. 10, pp. 435-449, 454-460.
Questions:
1. Wootton: (1) What are the “rights of man”? What’s wrong with them”? (2) What is it to be an alienated person? How are the workers alienated? When the worker is alienated? (3) “Life itself appears only a means to life.” Explain.
2. Klosko: (1) What role does ideology play? (2) What is the nature of communist society?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
April 28, Thursday Catching up & Review
******************************************************************************
Week 16
May 3, Tuesday 3rd in-class exam
******************************************************************************