CONTENTS PAGE .uk



[pic]

[pic]

CONTENTS

Page

Summary of Content: 3

Educational Aims: 3

Learning Outcomes: 3

Module Evaluation: 4

Method and Frequency of Class: 5

Lecture Titles: 5

Method of Assessment: 12

Reading Information: 13

Coursework Support: 17

Guidance to Essay Writing: 17

Some Rules of Thumb for Writing Argumentative Essays 18

Assessed Essay Titles: 20

Example of Past Exam Papers: 23

Summary of Content:

This module introduces students to the ideas of key thinkers in the history of western political thought. We look carefully at the canonical works of five thinkers in the history of political thought: Plato, Aristotle, Niccolo Machiavelli, Thomas Hobbes and John Locke. The module considers the impact of these thinkers on ancient and modern political thought and practices, with reference to the different contexts in which they wrote. We consider the way in which these thinkers have approached the ‘big’ questions and ideas that lie behind everyday political life. The module examines questions such as: What is justice? What is the purpose of government? What is the best form of government? Is the state ever entitled to restrict our freedom to do what we want? Why should we obey the state? When is it right to have a revolution?

Educational Aims:

This module aims to give students:

a) A critical understanding of the major works of key historical political philosophers

b) An appreciation of some of the central concepts and themes in political philosophy, and how these have developed through time

c) An understanding of how the texts studied were set against the politics of their day

d) An ability to critically assess the arguments of the thinkers under consideration

Learning Outcomes:

These will be:

i) Knowledge and understanding:

By the end of the module you will have knowledge of:

• the history of western political thought

• some central issues and debates of political philosophy

• The contexts in which the various thinkers wrote

• The principal arguments of their canonical texts

• Their analysis of key ideas such as property, liberty, the role of the state etc.

ii) Intellectual skills:

By the end of the module you should have:

• enhanced your skills of critical analysis and conceptual thought

• acquired confidence in handling challenging theoretical material

• an ability to compare the ideas of complex thinkers

• an ability to engage in detailed textual analysis

• an ability to develop logical arguments and to engage with theoretical abstractions in political thought

iii) Professional/Practical skills:

• acquired advanced writing skills under exam conditions

• an ability to contribute to discussions and debates in tutorials

iv) Transferable & Key skills:

• acquired transferable skills such as effective time management, the presentation of material, and individual and group work

• an ability to read critically primary and secondary material and to use it selectively in essays and in examinations

v) IT skills:

• Use of WebCT

• Search and retrieval of information

Module Evaluation:

Evaluation and feedback are crucial to the success of any module. The School wants students to have their say on Politics modules. Therefore modules are formally evaluated on a biennial basis, so please use this opportunity to have your say. If you have any other comments or queries regarding this module, please contact the Module Convenor.

Method and Frequency of Class:

|Activity |Number of Sessions |Duration of a Session |

|Lecture |11 |1 hr |

|Tutorial |5 |1 hr |

| | | |

|Location of Lecture: |B62 Law & Social Sciences |

|Day: |Tuesday |

|Time: |14:00 |

|Location of Tutorial: |Various (register via Nexus) |

|Day: |Various |

|Time: |Various (register via Nexus) |

Lecture notes and links to on-line materials will be made available via WebCT

Lecture Titles:

The weekly lecture titles are as follows:

Week one (28th Sept) Introduction/Plato

Week two (5th Oct) Plato

Week three (12th Oct) Aristotle

Week four (19th Oct) Aristotle

Week five (26th Oct) Machiavelli

Week six (2nd Nov) Machiavelli

Week seven (9th Nov) Essay writing in political theory

Week eight (16th Nov) Hobbes

Week nine (23rd Nov) Hobbes

Week ten (30th Nov) Locke

Week eleven (7th Dec) Locke

For the day, time, and location of your seminar group, please check NEXUS

Seminar Classes:

Seminars are a student-centred method of learning. Your participation in the seminars is vital if you are to get the most out of the module. They provide an opportunity to gain experience in presenting ideas and arguments in a formal setting, and allow you to raise issues that interest you. Please note that seminars are a crucial element of the module and are compulsory for students. A register of names will be taken at each meeting and persistent absenteeism will be reported.

NB: Certain core texts are listed for each seminar class. In order for you to participate effectively in the seminars it is important that you read the core texts in advance of the seminars sessions and that you answer the set reading questions for each seminar. Make sure you bring your answers and your copy of the relevant text with you to class. The reading questions form the foundation for the multiple choice section of the final examination.

The suggestions for further reading will also be helpful for seminars and are essential for writing your essays.

Please note that registers will be taken in tutorials, should you be unable to attend, please email the Seminar Tutor.

Seminar Class 1: Plato

Core Reading:

Plato, The Republic (esp. books I-V)

Available free on-line @

The reading is also available to download from the WebCT site.

Make sure you bring a copy of the text with you to class.

Reading Questions:

Write answers to the following preparation questions and bring them with you to class. Seminar discussion will be based on your answers to these questions.

1. Which character acts as the spokesperson for Plato’s own views in the Republic?

2. Of which city-state was Plato a citizen?

3. Which political value – equality, liberty, justice, fraternity – is Plato most concerned with in the Republic?

4. Cephalus and Plemarchus claim that justice is comprised of the principles of speaking the truth and repaying debts. What contrary point does Socrates’ subsequent rebuttal of this claim intend to show?

5. Thrasymachus claims that justice is the advantage of the stronger. What does he mean by this? What contrary point does Socrates’ subsequent rebuttal intend to show?

6. What type of government does Plato approve of?

7. How many classes are there in Plato’s ideal society?

8. ‘But if someone who belongs by nature to the class of artisans and business men is puffed up by wealth or popular support or physical strength or any similar quality, and tries to do an Auxiliary’s job; or if an Auxiliary who is not up to it tries to take on the functions of a Ruler...Well, I think you’ll agree that this...spells destruction to our state.’

‘Certainly.’

‘Interference by the three classes with each other’s jobs...does the greatest harm to our state, and we are entirely justified in calling it the worst of evils.’

‘Absolutely justified.’

‘But will you not agree that the worst of evils for a state is injustice?’

‘Of course’.

‘Then that gives us a definition of injustice. And conversely when each of our three classes (Businessmen, Auxiliaries and Guardians) does it own job and minds its own business, that, by contrast, is justice and makes our city just.’ (Book IV, 434)

How does Plato arrive at this conclusion?

Seminar Class 2: Aristotle

Core Reading:

1. Aristotle, The Politics (esp.book 1, chs 1-6; book III, chs 1-18)

Available free on-line @



2. The Nicomachean Ethics (book V, chs 1-5)

Available free on-line @



The reading is also available to download from the WebCT site.

Make sure you bring a copy of the text with you to class.

Reading Questions:

Write answers to the following preparation questions and bring them with you to class. Seminar discussion will be based on your answers to these questions.

1. What is the aim of the Politics?

2. What does Aristotle mean when he says that man is a ‘political animal’?

3. Why does Aristotle spend so much time on the subject of slavery? What is the distinction between natural slavery and conventional slavery? What is the effect of Aristotle’s argument on conventional slavery? Aristotle claims that women should not be treated as the same as slaves. On what grounds does he make this distinction?

4. What is the difference in principle between a ‘correct’ constitution and a ‘deviant’ constitution?

5. What is the best life for a human being? What is the best life for a citizen? How do the two relate to each other?

6. Why is “equality in freedom” not a sufficient justification for why the demos should rule? And why is wealth not a sufficient justification for why the oligarch’s should rule? Are both claims (above) entirely wrong (Bk 3, espec chp.s 8 and 9)? Explain.

7. Aristotle claims that justice can and must include some forms of inequality, that sometimes unequal things should be given to those who are unequal. He uses the example of the flutes (Bk 3, chp 12). Explain.

8. What are the arguments for and against “rule by laws” versus “rule by men” (Bk.3).

Seminar Class 3: Machiavelli

Core Reading:

N Machiavelli, The Prince (Entire text)

Available free on-line @

The reading is also available to download from the WebCT site.

Make sure you bring a copy of the text with you to class.

Reading Questions:

Write answers to the following preparation questions and bring them with you to class. Seminar discussion will be based on your answers to these questions.

1. What type of state is Machiavelli interested in, in The Prince, specifically?

1. How are new princedoms acquired and held?

2. What two broad maxims can be offered to a new ruler such that, if they are carried out, they will make him seem experienced?

(Good laws and good armies; the right qualities of princely leadership (virtu) )

3. What does Machiavelli mean by Virtu, and why is it worth having? Give examples used by Machiavelli of leaders who have displayed Virtu and those who have not. Do any modern politicians display virtu in the Machiavellian sense?

4. What understanding of Virtu does Machiavelli not mean (give examples)?

5. Which constitution does Machiavelli think best equipped to promote virtú?

6. “It now remains for us to see how a prince should govern his conduct towards his subjects or his friends. I know that this has often been written about before, and so I hope it will not be thought presumptuous for me to do so, as, especially in discussing this subject, I draw up an original set of rules. But since my intention is to say something that will prove of practical use to the inquirer, I have thought it proper to represent things as they are in real truth, rather than as they are imagined.”

How does Machiavelli see his advice differing from those of his predecessors in this extract? Give examples of where Machiavelli’s advice that contain the “real truth” rather than imagination. Does Machiavelli achieve this?

Seminar Class 4: Hobbes

Core Reading:

T Hobbes, Leviathan (esp. pt 1, chs 10-16, pt II - chs 17-30)

Available free on-line @



The reading is also available to download from the WebCT site.

Make sure you bring a copy of the text with you to class.

Reading Questions:

Write answers to the following preparation questions and bring them with you to class. Seminar discussion will be based on your answers to these questions.

1. What is the State of Nature and why does Hobbes use it?

2. What innate human faculty makes humans want to escape the state of nature?

3. ‘Whatsoever is the object of any mans Appetite or Desire, that is it which for his part he calleth Good: And the object of his hate, and aversion, Evill… For these words of Good, Evill, and Contemptible, are ever used with relation to the person that useth them: There being nothing simply and absolutely so, nor any common Rule of Good and Evil, to be taken from the nature of the objects themselves…’ (39)

If there is no good nor evil in the nature of objects themselves, then where does good or evil come from, according to Hobbes? What would the opposing view look like?

4. What desires do individuals have in the state of nature, and how do they best satisfy them?

5. Why, according to Hobbes, does conflict occur in the state of nature? Is such conflict inevitable or is co-operation possible?

6. ‘That a man be willing, when others are so too, as farre-forth, as for peace, and defence of himselfe he shall think it necessary, to lay down this right to all things; and be contented with so much liberty against other men, as he would allow other men against himselfe.’

What does Hobbes mean by the above passage? What reasons does Hobbes give for thinking that individuals will act in this way? Is he right to think so?

Seminar Class 5: Locke

Core Reading:

J Locke, The Second Treatise on Government (Entire text)

Available free on-line @

The reading is also available to download from the WebCT site.

Make sure you bring a copy of the text with you to class.

Reading Questions:

Write answers to the following preparation questions and bring them with you to class. Seminar discussion will be based on your answers to these questions.

1. The subject of the Second Treatise is the legitimate use of political power. But what does Locke mean by ‘political power’?

2. What are the main features of Locke’s version of the State of Nature? How, if at all, does it differ from Hobbes’s?

3. What is Locke’s fundamental law of nature? Give an example of at least one ‘derivative’ law of nature. What is the relationship between the two?

4. ‘And to this I say, that every man that hath any possession or enjoyment of any part of the dominions of any government doth hereby give his tacit consent, and is as far forth obliged to obedience to the laws of that government, during such enjoyment, as any one under it…’ (Chapter VIII, sec. 119)

What is ‘tacit’ consent, for Locke? How adequate is the argument for tacit consent (can you think of any counter objections)? Is the consent of the governed necessary for Locke’s own view of political authority?

5. On what grounds is rebellion against a government justified?

6. ‘Though the earth, and all inferior creatures, be common to all men, yet every man has a property in his own person: this no body has any right to but himself. The labour of his body, and the work of his hands, we may say, are properly his. Whatsoever then he removes out of the state that nature hath provided, and left it in, he hath mixed his labour with, and joined to it something that is his own, and thereby makes it his property. It being by him removed from the common state nature hath placed it in, it hath by this labour something annexed to it, that excludes the common right of other men: for this labour being the unquestionable property of the labourer, no man but he can have a right to what that is once joined to, at least where there is enough, and as good, left in common for others.’ (Chapter v. Sec 27).

How do we come to own property according to this passage? Does it follow that from mixing our labour we own the thing we mix it with? What does Locke mean by: ‘at least where there is enough, and as good, left in common for others’? What restrictions does this put on Locke’s notion of what we can legitimately own?

Method of Assessment:

The 10 credit version of this module will be assessed on the following basis:

|Assessment Type |Weight |Requirements |

|Exam 1 |60% |1.5 hr exam, written (40%) and multiple choice |

| | |(20%) |

|Coursework 1 |40% |1500-word essay |

The 15 credit version of this module will be assessed on the following basis:

|Assessment Type |Weight |Requirements |

|Exam 1 |40% |1.5 hr exam, written (40%) and multiple choice |

| | |(20%) |

|Coursework 1 |40% |1500-word essay |

|Coursework 2 |20% |500 word literature review |

You must submit an electronic copy of your essay via the module’s WebCT site, taking note of the individual ID number that will be generated once you have successfully uploaded it. This process is self-explanatory.

After you have done that – and only then - you must submit one hard copy of the essay to the School Office by Thursday 18th November 2010. A submission sheet should be completed and attached to the essay. You are required to enter the WebCT ID number on the cover sheet, as proof that you have already electronically submitted the essay. The submission sheet and the top of page of your essay should then be date stamped, and submitted via the First year filing cabinet situated in the School foyer by the lift. Essays handed in after 4pm will be stamped as late and the usual University penalties will be applied.

The literature review should be submitted to the School Office by 4 pm on Friday 10th December 2010. The same procedure as outlined above should be followed.

Failure to complete either process ie electronic and/or hard copy submission will result in late penalties being applied.

The electronic copies will be scanned to detect plagiarism. It is therefore imperative that you consult the Student Handbook, which outlines what is counted as plagiarism and advises you how to avoid it. Failure to submit an electronic copy even if you submit hard copies on time will mean that the essay will be counted as having not been submitted.

The standard University penalty for late submission should be 5% absolute standard University scale per normal working day, until the mark reaches zero. For example, an original mark of 67% would be successively reduced to 62%, 57%, 52%, 47% etc. Normal working days include vacation periods, but not weekends or public holidays. Applications for extensions will not normally be considered retrospectively. Any student wishing to apply for an extension should collect and complete the necessary forms from the School Office and submit these to the relevant Year Tutor together with any necessary documentary evidence.

Plagiarism is a serious offence and University regulations will be applied.

Reading Information:

On-Line Resources

On WebCT you will find a site for this module where you will be able to access lecture notes and other course materials

There are plenty of resources on the internet for web-surfers, including full-texts of the major works of political theory. Most of the thinkers have pages dedicated to them and some of them are the subject of discussion groups and forums. As good a starting point as any in Richards Kimber’s page of political thought resources, at:

Recommended reading

The library is in general well stocked with materials for this module. You will need to read the relevant sections from the core (primary) texts each week. Secondary texts – listed below under ‘General Reading’ and ‘Topic Readings’ - will enable you to deepen your understanding of the different thinkers, and you should read some of these in preparation for the coursework essay and the exam. You should also run a ‘subject’ search for each of the thinkers in the University of Nottingham Library Online Catalogue (UNLOC), this will reveal many more useful texts for you to examine. In addition, you should consult the specialist journals in political theory. Among the most important are: Political Theory; Political Studies; and History of Political Thought.

Core Texts

It is crucial to have your own copy of the core texts (indicated below) and bring them with you to Tutorials.

1. Plato The Republic (esp. books I-V)

Available free on-line @

2. Aristotle The Politics (esp.book 1, chs 1-6; book III, chs 1-18)

Available free on-line @



The Nicomachean Ethics (book V, chs 1-5)

Available free on-line @



3. N Machiavelli The Prince

(Entire text)

Available free on-line @



4. T Hobbes Leviathan (esp. pt 1, chs 10-16, pt II - chs 17-30)

Available free on-line @



5. J Locke The Second Treatise on Government

(Entire text)

Available free on-line @



General Reading – Books, journals etc

* = Important text

Many of these texts contain introductory chapters on the thinkers we are studying.

Skinner The Foundations of Modern Political Thought. Vol.2, The Age of reformation

Wolin, S Politics and Vision

MacPherson, C. B The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism

Burns & Goldie (eds.) The Cambridge History of Political Thought 1450-1700

Foryth, & Keens-Soper Political Classics: a guide to the essential texts from Plato to Rousseau

*Hampsher-Monk, I A History of Modern Political Thought

McLelland, J. S A History of Political Thought

Pateman, C The Problem of Political Obligation

*Plamenatz, J Man & Society: political and social theories from Machiavelli to Marx

Sabine, G The History of Political Thought

Topic Readings

Plato

Plato The Laws

Plato The Statesman

Annas, J Plato: a very short introduction

Lycos, K Plato on justice and power

Kraut, R (ed.) Plato’s Republic: critical essays

Reeve, C.D.C. Philosopher-kings: the argument of Plato’s Republic

Rice, D. H. A guide to Plato’s Republic

Santas, G (ed.) The Blackwell guide to Plato’s Republic

Samaras, T Plato on democracy

Vlastos, G (ed.) Plato: a collection of critical essays

Williams, B Plato: the invention of philosophy

Wilson, J. F. The politics of moderation: an interpretation of Plato’s Republic

Note: you will also find these articles on Plato on the WebCT site for this module

Heinaman,  R., ‘Social Justice in Plato’s Republic,’ Polis, 15 (1998), pp.  23-44.

Loizou, A., ‘The Threefold Psyche and the Dramatisation of Justice in Plato’s Republic,’ Polis, 16 (1999), pp. 30-50.

Demetriou, K. N., ‘A ‘Legend’ in Crisis: The Debate over Plato’s Politics,’ 1930-1960, Polis, 19 (2002), pp. 61-92.

McCoy, M. B., ‘Sophistry and Philosophy in Plato’s Republic,’ Polis, 22, 2 (2005), pp. 265-86.

Schofield, M., ‘Law and Absolutism in the Republic,’ Polis, 23, 2 (2006), pp. 319-27.

Wallach, J. R., ‘Democracy in Ancient Greek Political Theory: 1906–2006,’ Polis, 23, 2 (2006), pp. 350-67.

Aristotle

Aristotle The Nicomachean ethics

Barker, E. (trans.)The Politics of Aristotle

Everson, S (ed.) The Politics and The Constitution of Athens

Shields, C Aristotle

Kraut, R (ed.) The Blackwell guide to Aristotle’s Nicomachean ethics

Frank, J A democracy of distinction: Aristotle and the work of politics

Kraut, R Aristotle: political philosophy  

Barnes, J Aristotle: a very short introduction

Voegelin, E Plato and Aristotle  

Barnes, J (ed.) The Cambridge companion to Aristotle

Miller, F. D. Nature, justice, and rights in Aristotle’s Politics

Ross, D Aristotle

Barnes, J Aristotle  

Grimaldi, W. M.A. Aristotle’s Rhetoric: a commentary

Barker, E The political thought of Plato and Aristotle

Machiavelli

Machiavelli, N Discourse on Livy

Available free on-line @



Coyle, M (ed.) Niccolò Machiavelli's The prince: new interdisciplinary essays

Plamenatz, J Man and society: political and social theories from Machiavelli to Marx Vol. 1, From the Middle Ages to Locke. -- 2nd ed

Viroli, M et al (ed.) Machiavelli and republicanism

Garver, E Machiavelli and the history of prudence

Hulliung, M Citizen Machiavelli

Skinner, Q Machiavelli

Fleisher, M (ed.) Machiavelli and the nature of political thought

Gilmore, M. P (ed.) Studies on Machiavelli

Parel, A The political calculus: essays on Machiavelli's philosophy

Hobbes

Baumgold, D Hobbes’s Political Theory

Beackon, S & Reeve, A The Benefits of Reasonable Conduct: The

Leviathan Theory of Obligation, Political Theory, 4,

4, (1976) pp.423-38

Gauthier, D The Logic of Leviathan: The Moral and Political Theory of Thomas Hobbes

Gauthier, D The Social Contract as Ideology, Philosophy and

Public Affairs, 6, 2, (1977) p.130-6

Hampsher-Monk, I A History of Modern Political Thought ch.1

Hampton, J Hobbes and the Social Contract Tradition

Kavka, G Hobbesian Moral and Political Theory

Macpherson, C. B The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism ch.2

McNeilly, F. S The Anatomy of Leviathan

Peters, R. S Hobbes

Rogers, G. A & Ryan, A Perspectives on Thomas Hobbes

von Leyden, W Hobbes and Locke

Warrender, H The Political Philosophy of Thomas Hobbes

Locke

von Leyden, W Hobbes and Locke

Dunn, J The Political Thought of John Locke

Gough , J. W John Locke’s Political Philosophy

Grant, R John Locke’s Liberalism

Hampsher-Monk, I A History of Modern Political Thought ch.2

Harris, I The Mind of John Locke

Macpherson, C. B The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism ch.5

Pateman, C The Problem of Political Obligation

Pitkin, H Obligation and Consent, American Political Science

Review, 59 & 60 (1965-66)

Schochet, G. J (ed.) Life, Liberty and Property: Essays on Locke’s Political Ideas

Coursework Support:

The Hallward Library and Halls of Residence have a number of networked PCs to facilitate access to information on holdings.

As Module Convenor please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any difficulties with the module or assessed work. I will be available without appointment during my office hours. Appointments to meet at other times can be made by calling me on my direct line or via email. My contact details together with office hours are noted at the front of this module outline.

Guidance to Essay Writing:

A short guide for students on essay writing skills and an outline of the marking criteria used by staff is available from the School Intranet.

Some Rules of Thumb for Writing Argumentative Essays

General advice about essay writing, penalties for late submission, referencing, plagiarism, etc., is provided by the School of Politics’ Guide to Essay Writing, available from the School Office.

When writing a political theory essay it is worthwhile bearing in mind the following points.

1. Argue for a particular thesis in response to the question and defend it in light of the best objections you can conceive.

A political theory paper is better to the extent that it argues for a definite conclusion, explicitly setting out the argument for the position. This means that an essay that merely surveys some or all of the positions concerning the issue at hand without defending a particular position, should be avoided at all costs.

Defending a thesis through argument means that you must be as critical of your own claims as you are of those you are arguing against. In making an argument it will be necessary to refer to the work of others. In so doing, it is advantageous not only to elucidate, but also to appraise the views to which you are referring. How convincing are the arguments for or against it? Are there any relevant distinctions that the author has omitted? Are the inferences valid and the premises of the argument sound? Are the analogies used similar in all relevant respects?

Make sure that what you are arguing actually answers the question being asked. A well written, well argued essay will never score highly if it does not address the question. In some cases the question includes technical terms (e.g., justice, oligarchy, political obligation, state of nature, tacit consent, etc.). These will require some definition and, probably, some discussion.

It is always beneficial to take a definite stand on the issue yourself and argue for it as convincingly as possible. In those (rare) cases where this is not possible, for example, where you are undecided on the issue, you ought to argue why neither side of the case is sufficiently convincing.

2. Structure

Essays should be clearly structured. Generally this means that an essay should include the following: (1) an opening section: here the key terms are defined, and perhaps the main features of the essay are sign-posted. (2) a middle section: here the arguments are developed, the necessary distinctions made, possible objections are responded to, and other positions are criticised. (3) conclusion(s): this section summarises the key features of the argument and re-addresses the original question in light of this.

3. No generalities

Do not start with or conclude with (or otherwise include) sweeping generalities such as: ‘Rawls’s theory of justice is the most important recent contribution to the perennial search for the ideal human society.’ Such remarks add nothing of substance; indeed, they subtract by distracting from the issues at hand. Moreover, they suggest that the writer is unsure what to say, and is looking for a way to fill some space. You do not want to create that suspicion. Just get right to the point.

4. Use of knowledge and style

Political theory essays do not require as much empirical evidence as, for instance, historical or political science essays. What is of primary importance is the quality of your reasoning and your understanding of the arguments and positions you discuss. If, however, empirical material is relevant it should be accurately stated.

When expounding the positions and arguments of others it is usually better to summarise them in your own words (with appropriate references) rather than to quote extensively. Quotation should be used when something important hangs on the precise use of the words. Thus, an essay should not simply be a string of quotations linked together by a few connecting sentences. Always reference the source when quoting and paraphrasing the work of others. Always try to illustrate and strengthen your arguments with examples and analogies that you have developed yourself. Astute analogies have much argumentative power.

5. Take the views under discussion seriously

The political theorists we are reading are not fools. If, as you describe the relevant parts of the views, you find yourself attributing foolish views to them, assume you have misinterpreted them. (Perhaps you have not, but treat ‘misinterpretation’ as the default setting.) One tactic for taking a view seriously is to “argue against yourself” (see section 1 above). Ask yourself how the thinker you are criticising would respond to your criticism. Try to get “inside” the conception you are discussing; develop a sense of its internal integrity, and see if you are able to understand how someone (who may have strange ideas, but is neither a fool nor a sociopath) might have come to hold the view in question. The books and articles you read are the product of sustained reflection, over a long period. The authors often distributed drafts of their manuscripts to other people, and then tried to incorporate responses to the objections they received. The result is not that their views are right, or coherent, or nice. But you can be sure that they have greater depth and coherence than you may suspect on first reading.

6. Communicating through writing

Clarity of expression and rigour of analysis are all important in writing political theory. This often requires much thought regarding how best to communicate ideas. Writing our ideas down on paper can often be very different to the way in which we think them up in our heads. Always re-read what you have written to see if it communicates what you are trying to say in a clear, logical, and convincing manner. It is often worth getting someone else to read a draft of your essay, and then to re-draft it in order to eliminate obscurities or holes. Alternatively, read it out aloud.

Writing clearly is important. Some first steps to doing this can include making sure you are using short sentences, avoiding page-long paragraphs, and being careful to signal transitions.

In high school you were probably told not to use the first person singular. Forget that piece of bad advice. ‘In this paper I will argue that …’ is perfectly legitimate. ‘The author of this paper will argue that …’ is not. Take responsibility for the views you are arguing for.

7. Lecture and seminar notes and handouts

Neither lecture notes/handouts nor seminar notes should be relied upon to write essays or exam answers. Lectures are primarily to guide you through the reading, and seminars are for discussion about a single text. Writing a good essay requires much individual work outside lectures and seminars. Evidence of independent reading and thought will be rewarded.

Assessed Essay Titles:

1. How successful is Plato’s defence of rule by the wise?

2. Why did Aristotle think that slavery is not unjust?

3. ‘Machiavelli’s The Prince is merely an exercise in cynicism’. Discuss.

4. How compelling is Locke’s account of property?

5. Is Hobbes an apologist for tyranny?

Note: Further reading for essay questions is available via WebCT

Reminder: essay submission date is 4pm on: 18th November 2010

Literature Review Assessment

Note: This piece of assessment is only applicable to those undertaking the 15 credit version of this module.

Length: 500-700 words

Plato.

And what about his demand that the state should be founded upon Justice? Even writers who criticise Plato believe that his political doctrine... is clearly distinguished from modern totalitarianism by these aims of his, the happiness of the citizens, and the rule of Justice. Crossman, for instance, whose critical attitude can be gauged from his remark that 'Plato's philosophy is the most savage and most profound attack on liberal ideas which history can show', seems still to believe that Plato's plan is 'the building of a perfect state in which every citizen is really happy'. Another example is Joad who discusses the similarities between Plato's programme and that of fascism at some length, but who asserts that there are fundamental differences...In spite of such arguments I believe that Plato's political programme, far from being morally superior to totalitarianism, is fundamentally identical with it.

(Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies, Volume One: The Spell of Plato, p.92)

Question:

Either:

1. Argue against Popper’s use of modern ideas and associated terminology (such as ‘totalitarianism’) for interpreting Plato’s position.

Or:

2. Argue in defence of Popper’s use of modern ideas and associated terminology (such as ‘totalitarianism’) for interpreting Plato’s position.

Answer only one (not both) of the above questions.

The following pieces (all available via WebCT) may help you in formulating an argument and lending it support. This is not an exhaustive list.

Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies, Volume One: The Spell of Plato, Chapter Seven.

John Cleary, ‘Popper on Freedom and Equality in Plato’, Polis, 22, 1, 2005.

G.P Grant, ‘Plato and Popper’, The Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science, 20, 2, 1954.

John Plamenatz, Man and Society, Volume One, Introduction.

Quentin Skinner, ‘Meaning and Understanding in the History of Ideas’, in his Visions of Politics, Volume One, pp.57-89.

George Klosko, ‘Popper’s Plato: An Assessment’, Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 24, 4, 1996.

Anastasios Giannaras, ‘Plato and K R Popper: Toward a Critique of Plato’s Political Philosophy’, Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 24, 4, 1996.

Joseph Maquire, ‘Some Greek Views of Democracy and Totalitarianism’, Ethics, 56, 2, 1946.

Reminder: Literature review submission date is 4 pm on: 10th December 2010

Example of Past Exam Papers:

A full past paper is available via the WebCT site for this module.

Some sample questions:

Time: 1.5 hours

The exam will be in two sections. Section A is worth 40% of the overall grade for the module, and it recommended that you spend one hour on Section A.

In section A you will have to choose two questions from a list of five (there will be one question to choose from on each of the thinkers we have studied). For each question you will be presented with a short extract of text, and you will have to answer a question that relates to the text

For example:

‘Everyone realizes how praiseworthy it is for a prince to honour his word and to be straightforward rather than crafty in his dealings; nonetheless contemporary experience shows that princes who have achieved great things have been those who have given their word lightly, who have known how to trick men with their cunning, and who, in the end, have overcome those abiding by honest principles.’ (Machiavelli, The Prince).

Critically evaluate Machiavelli’s theory of virtú and effective princely rule, with reference to this passage.

Section B is a multiple choice test

There will be 20 questions in total and the questions will cover each of the thinkers we have looked at on the course. Section B is worth 20% of the overall mark for the module, and it is recommended that you spend ½ an hour on Section B

For example:

1. For Hobbes, what innate human faculty allows man to discover how to escape the state of nature?

a) Fear

b) Love

c) Reason

d) Altruism

2. Machiavelli died in

a) 1525

b) 1534

c) 1569

d) 1527

3. Which political value do you most associate with Plato?

a) Liberty

b) Equality

c) Justice

d) Fraternity

-----------------------

Political Ideas in Revolution

M11001 (10 credits)

M11151 (15 credits)

Level 1

Taught Autumn Semester

Module Convenor: Dr David Stevens

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download