History of Political Thought - Science topic

It was in A. Gramsci. I quaderni dal carcere (his letters from jail, several editions), namely a letter dated March 26, 1927, sent to his sister Teresina Gramsci Paulesu. There are nowadays more than 400 of these letters published and you will find several addressing the special culture of Sardinian workers.

One of the main sources is Cicero, De Republica, text that translates the Aristotelian concept of "koinonia politike" by "societas civilis". It is probably a key development since "socius" was used to any kind of association from trade to other professional gatherings. Cicero explains that the specific difference which makes a people is to be the unit from a plurality (multitiudo) formed by association (sociatus), on the basis of a legal agreement (consensus juris) and a community of interest (communio utilitatis).

I am not quite sure if it is good, but perhaps:

Andrew Wallace-Hadrill (Hg.): Patronage in ancient society. London, New York 1989.

Hi Mohammad,

Could you please provide a more precise question? (Context of research?) What (I think) I see is: you are interested in 'category generation'. Have you read the tons of reinforcement learning books out there how categories are learned? Or the literature on 'category generation' models (e.g. SUSTAIN)? Or the "Bayesian approach" asking/formalizing where category hypotheses come from? (The last one looks like the answer to your question on a superficial level.)

Best, René

I think that Sen's work revealed what people working in a more applied way on hunger said even before him: hunger is often the result of poverty than insuffieint food being produced. When the idea of food enttitlement decline came up, many I know said that this is little new, but obviously it was new in academia. The myths about hunger were taken up already by Frances Moore Lappé, Joseph Collins in 1977. Also in many NGOs working in the fields of food security the idea that hunger and also starvation is caused by poverty was not entirely new. Beyond that, of course, one can only establish command over food that is there, so the supply side is not entirely out, but food security is a combination of the supply and demand side of food.

Lappe, F. M., Collins, J., & Fowler, C. (1977). Food first. Beyond the myth of scarcity. Houghton Mifflin Co..

Lappé, F. M., & Collins, J. (1986). World hunger: Twelve myths.

Algumas empresas já fazem isso. Substituem alguns impostos para financiar pesquisas e projetos.

Alguns editais ficam abertos nas páginas das próprias empresas.

The process of FGM highlights many complex universal human rights and cultural relativism arguments including, but not limited to, perspective, creation, and acceptance.  Recognizing the importance of cultural relativism, however, is also critical to having an accurate and honest discourse regarding why FGM has been viewed positively in various cultures. FGM poses serious mental and physical health risks for women and young girls, especially for those who have undergone the more extreme forms of genital mutilation. A young girl who does not undergo FGM may suffer long-term cultural consequences. For example, the girl may be ostracized by her  family  and,  in  some  instances,  may  not  be  able  to  marry.Failure to suffer through the procedure can lead to various social pressures. FGM is a practice that demonstrates the “systematic victimization  of  women.”  Critics  have  argued  that  “to say women  are victimized  reinforces  the  stereotype  that  women  ‘are’  victims. ” However,  if  women  do  not  recognize  their  victimization,  they  are denying their subordination and thus will be unable to speak out against male dominance.

Dear Kathleen

Please follow these links:

Regards 

Mainz, Germany

Dear Ward & readers,

The readings you suggest might certainly be helpful to the present question and thread, but if it were a matter of explicit references to Aristotle in Polybius, then I suspect they would have already turned up.

Lacking explicit references, it remains to look for similarities of content. Does Polybius make use of recognizable Aristotelian arguments in relation to his doubts on the persistence of Roman rule? What grounds does he give for this view? Looking again at the summary Bates initially supplied, what strikes me as interesting are the Aristotelian arguments concerning revolution and neglect of "small matters" and arguments concerned with lack of cultural homogeneity in the polity.

Generally, I'm inclined to suppose that a major defect of empires generally, is that the central, cosmopolitan authority becomes incapable to keeping track of relevant detail in the expanded provinces. The sheer extent of the empire becomes problematic along with the variation of constitutive political and social detail in the provinces.  Imposed uniformity of policy may facilitate central administration, but at the danger or cost of disrupting local life and relations. The provinces may thus become more like subservient dependencies, ever in need of support from centralized administration, instead of offering support to the empire.

H.G. Callaway

Dear Ferenc,  hi, two points:

1.  There is much work in IR that demonstrates that the use of historical analogy by policymakers has led to poor policies being adopted. This does not seem because policymakers are poor historians (I note Goldstein's Lessons in Disaster here) but rather that the past and the future in terms of our understanding and knowledge really are different.  

2.  IR scholars are great 'data miners' who search history for specific events that support their hypothesis - what else can they do?  Historians are similar in imposing their mental frameworks on the past - but again what else can they do, this is an inherent human cognitive constraint. (note that this is different to the instrumental use of history for political purposes which is arguably growing).  I do like E.H Carr's 'What is history' for a person who encompassed both disciplines.

Regards,

Peter 

Are you looking for a symbolic qutation from a famous charactor, or "a" good one about your suject matter, in general? A good qutation could come from an experienced native individual, without any influence of outsiders, too.

I agree with much which Professor Callaway has to say and would be interested in his views on another recently posed question about what John Boehner's resignation has to say, if anything, regarding the political "atmosphere" in Washington.

Regarding the relationship between politics, political thought, and the history of political thought, I think it is more likely that the work of political thinkers has been influenced by political events than that political actors facing challenges, such as pressure placed on nation state borders by a surge of immigration, have been influenced by political thought. 

For example, Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) was deeply concerned by the execution of Charles I and the English Civil War.  He states this explicitly and his defense of absolute monarchy in Leviathan is believed to be justified in preventing similar wars of "all against all".  John Locke's Second Treatise of Government, published in 1688, argues that absolute monarchy is no (legitimate) form of government at all and is a defense of the success of England's Glorious Revolution.

Although Locke's political thought was of tremendous influence on the delegates who wrote the US Constitution, which was ratified in 1787, I think it is fair to say that no work of political thought has played nearly such a formative role on political actors or events in the US since the Constitutional Convention.  

Finally, the harmonious, transcendent, and absolute nature of Plato's ontological Truths, presented in The Republic and other dialogues, have been seen by many of his interpreters as a reaction to the political turmoil and declining cultural dominance of Athens evident during his life (427-347 BC).

To the extent that political thought can provide guidance to political elites dealing with the current "immigration crisis in Europe", the normative nature of state borders is an issue of key importance.  Among contemporary political thinkers there is more disagreement than agreement on the nature of borders.  Michael Walzer (Spheres of Justice) argues that without clearly-defined and secure borders, a state stands to lose control of its very identity.  On the other hand, thinkers, such as Carol Gould (Rethinking Democracy), have challenged traditional conceptions of the sanctity and normative significance of borders with theoretical work on global democracy and transnational justice.

Hello Vishal,

I would say that social anarchism is not a political ontology, but rather, a political philosophy. Political ontology has a place in the overall ontology of human life and some ontologies are bound to include political concepts. I have been out of that business for several years so I cannot direct you toward current events.

Best regards,

Marion

Dear Clifford,

thanks for your kind notice, it is good to hear that in some respect I had a good intuition. ANd again, it is a good cautionary remark that translations may easily misrepresent their authors.

Best,

Ferenc

These are helpful.  I welcome others who have ideas.

Briefly, the association with artistocracy is quite of interest to me.  And, the notion of fulfillment of a social demand in honour killing (even if reviled by others) is helpful to think with as well.

Dear Feri,

embourgeoisement is the (forced?) translation of  the German Verbürgerlichung butthat you of course know,  and the English word does contain bourgeoise -- you are right; the problem only repeats itself.

I am groping in the dark and I try to recall something from my Shakespeare-studies. What now comes to my mind is that the word borough  does not only mean 'town' or 'city' but also 'district', 'region' and, indeed, the biggest city in England (perhaps in Europe) in Shakespeare's time, i.e. London consisted of loose regions: city of Westminster, the city of London (itself) around St Paul's Cathedral, etc. So even if there was a wall or there was not, they thought of what we today call a town or city in terms of regions (districts), thus a town was an 'aggregate of districts' not a separate unit consisting of districts. In other words, a 'city-dweller' identified herself not as somebody living in a town but in a region: she lived in Westminster, and only "secondarily" in London. The further complication was that  Queen (Elizabeth) and her administration was in 'London', too but she lived in the Whitehall and not, strictly speaking, in 'London'. And boroughs were very much like villages, often with separate churches and markets, and the reflection and consciousness of living in a "town", or "city" came much later, when the French term was "borrowed". For some reason, they looked at organisational units, from the everyday perspective, differently: not in terms of a "unit consisting of...." but "some regions slowly built together creating a unit" (as in Hungary Balatonboglár and Balatonlelle 'reached' each other and for a while they were Boglár-Lelle, or Moson+Magyaróvár became Mosonmagyaróvár etc., not to mention Buda+Pest (+Óbuda))    Maybe one should do some research concerning the history of city/borough administration (where did the taxes go? to the borough or to 'London'?) and the legal-system  (did every borough have a judge?) -- the clue must be in their "form of life" :).   If one thinks she lives in a village (region/district), the village is the unit of  self-identification and not the larger unit (the city/town) the village had joined.  In Germany, there had to be city/town privileges which made it worthwhile to think in terms of belonging to the city directly (there were -- secondarily -- 'districts', 'regions' in 'German' cities/towns, too, of course).

But I am not a historian and this might be pure and false speculation, then ignore it., please :)

Best regards,

Géza

Often political theory is seen as a sub-field of political science.  Unlike other sub-fields of political science, political theory does not model its approach to knowledge on the natural sciences.  Political theorists see their field as among the humanities and as drawing from other humanities, such as the disciplines of ethics, history, linguistics, cultural anthropology, and other relevant fields.

Political philosophy is often seen as a branch of academic philosophy, with especially close and sometimes overlapping relationships to normative moral philosophy and meta-ethics.  Aristotle is particularly clear in underscoring his view of the reflexive nature of these relationships.

In comparing political philosophy with political theory, the scope and the broader more all-encompassing nature of political philosophy strikes me as essential.  Plato (Republic), Hobbes (Leviathan), and Marx (in the entire body of his work), are but three examples of political philosophers.  On the other hand, I would identify Machiavelli, James Madison, and Isaiah Berlin as three on many examples of political theorists.

A work of political philosophy is an attempt to achieve a level of generality which explores and draws conclusions about the nature and relationships between all the major features of government and politics, as well as the context in which political systems operate and are understood.  Works of political philosophy are grounded on significant assumptions about meta-physics and epistemology. Such works are also grounded theoretically by the mutually supportive nature of political principles, concepts, and institutions with fundamental moral principles, concepts, and institutions, such as justice, authority, human nature, and legitimacy. (This feature of political philosophy is no less the case in Marx's work than,for example, in the work of Plato.) The broad scope of political philosophy is complemented by its goal of presenting and defending timeless truths or bedrock meaning. (This is also the case with political philosophers, such as Hegel, for whom history, its laws of development and historical revelation and change are of central importance 

Of course, political theorists take an abstract approach, and  they investigate "the political" at a level of generality unfamiliar to scholars pursuing other sub-fields of political science.  Political theory has a focus on somewhat more specific basic or fundamental issues in politics than political philosophy.  There is far more attention to the development of mid-level or mid-range theory in approaching such issues than to ground understanding and to defend conclusions about politics in the most basic philosophical sub-fields,such as meta-physics, epistemology, or more recently linguistics and the meaning of meaning.

Machiavelli's concern with the principles and moral dilemmas of political leadership and the preservation and stability of a state led to conclusions in The Prince which are examples of mid-range theory that continue to stimulate examination and debate.  Madison's constitutional architecture was prompted by his deeply rooted goal to find institutional solutions under which citizens could be governed peacefully and effectively while, at the same time, prevent these political elites from becoming tyrants.  Madison's mid-range theory in achieving this goal is considered by many to be the most original and influential feature of the US Constitution of 1787.  Finally, Berlin's profound grasp of history and human nature were the tools he found essential to convincingly envision the possibility of tolerant and humane societies in which core objective moral values could be recognized and serve to guide action, while at the same time never forgetting that moral conflict between individuals, between individual societies, and even value conflict within the mind of each individual is inevitable and unavoidable.

Also Bourdieu's symbolic violence is pretty much the same. 

And Gayatri Spivak's "Can the Subaltern speak", also treats the same subject - the powerful classes ability to force its signs onto the dominated classes.

Markus,

Considering the advances in communication technology, it seems that democratic innovation in the 21st century will be markedly different than the old theoretical concepts of participatory democracy. My reasoning revolves around examples from the Arab Spring and the Hong Kong student democracy protests. What can be seen from these events is that social media has played a crucial role in uniting citizens, while not necessarily requiring physical meetings of the actors. Ultimately, the ability of peoples to organize without congregating physically is a direct evolution of the democratic process and must be understood at an institutional level. The question that comes to mind is how institutions and governments can integrate these new technologies into public discourse in an effort to let the voices of the people be heard, regardless of socio-economic status, party affiliation, or party(ies) in power.  I would recommend a book by Michael Saward which goes through some of the currently discussed problems in democracy. There exists within the book a plethora of examples and writings from various theorists on this matter which may help you direct your inquiry.

I look forward to seeing where this inquiry takes you and please feel free to contact me about any further questions or thoughts you may have about this subject.

All the best on your endeavor,

Regards

Jacob R Chambers 

Hi! - A rich information source to start with is" Makers of modern India" edited by Ramachandra Guha (The Belknap Press, 2011). What I like about the book: It puts political thought and political programmes into historical context and also shows how current political thought in India is linked to personalities of the late 19th and early 20th century. What I miss: A more thorough analysis of postcolonial thinkers' influence on political thinking in today's India.

Good success!