Between philosophy and politics: the alienation of political theory PDF
Preview Between philosophy and politics: the alienation of political theory
Between Philosophy and Politics : The title: Alienation of Political Theory author: Gunnell, John G. publisher: University of Massachusetts Press isbn10 | asin: 0870234978 print isbn13: 9780870234972 ebook isbn13: 9780585164380 language: English subject Political science--Philosophy. publication date: 1986 lcc: JA71.G86 1986eb ddc: 320/.01 subject: Political science--Philosophy. Page iv Between Philosophy and Politics The Alienation of Political Theory John G. Gunnell Page v Copyright © 1986 by The University of Massachusetts Press All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America LC 85-14106 ISBN 0-87023-497-8 (cloth); 498-6 (paper) Designed by Barbara Werden Set in Linotron Sabon by G&S Typesetters, Inc. Printed and bound by Cushing-Malloy, Inc. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Gunnell, John G. Between philosophy and politics. Bibliography: p. Includes index. 1. Political sciencePhilosophy. I. Title. JA71.G86 1986 320'.01 85-14106 ISBN 0-87023-497-8 (alk. paper) ISBN 0-87023-498-6 (pbk.: alk. paper) Page vi To Pam and Jenniwho know the difference between theory and practice. Page vii Contents Preface ix Introduction 1 1 10 The Alienation of Political Theory 2 43 Theory and Science 3 91 Theory and Tradition 4 134 Theory and Metatheory 5 169 The End of Political Theory 6 201 Politics and the Theory of the Conventional Object References 223 Index 235 Page ix Preface This work is a synthesis, clarification, and elaboration of a number of arguments, mostly critical, that I have made about the field of academic political theory and its relationship to philosophy and politics. These arguments have been the subject of considerable controversy and misunderstanding, and a principal purpose here is at least to make clear what is being said and to articulate unambiguously the themes that connect my criticisms of such ostensibly disparate enterprises as behavioral political science and the study of the history of political theory. More than one person has been quick to point out that my own work has been implicated in the very problems that I address, but I have no wish to avoid certain dimensions of this paradox or to suggest that my animadversions do not entail self- criticism. My arguments are deeply rooted in the dialectic of the discourse of academic political theory, and the criticisms are internal. I do not, however, wish to disguise the fact that I have a profound and serious quarrel with much of the work that constitutes the political theory "establishment." Although this quarrel is essentially one involving the substantive character of the field, it also relates to matters of style. Political theory has, I believe,become an increasingly effete but pretentious activity whose self-image and claims about it does and would do are conspicuously out of phase with its actual practice. For an activity so avowedly committed to reflection, criticism, and political transformation, it seems peculiarly resistant to authentic self-examination and actual involvement in the uncertainties of existential political action, even within the cloisters of the academy where it enjoys the potential privileges of citizenship. There are some debts that I am enthusiastic about acknowledging. Richard Martin, the editor at the University of Massachusetts Press, played a large part in the conception of this project, and he nurtured it with pa- Page x tience and encouragement as well as a rare understanding of the substance of the work. The association with my peers and teachers at the University of California at Berkeley during the early 1960s remains a formative influence and one that I increasingly nostalgically savor. Norman Jacobson's ideas continue to echo in my work in many ways, and he taught me that, of all things, political theory is not immune from having to take account of itself. Although some may not think my disagreements with Sheldon Wolin are negligible, it should be obvious that I have rotated around his intellectual compass. since 1964, Paul Kress and I have been engaged in a constant conversation, and Gene Poschman has been a source of insight since the day he came upon me lost in the stacks looking for something called the Congressional Record. I acknowledge their ideas the way Woody Guthrie acknowledged folk tunes. I, like many others, have for some time benefited from George Kateb's keen intellect and generous spirit, and it is a pleasure to be able to say so in something of a public manner. During the past few years, John Nelson and Ira Strauber have done much to make me aware of what I have said and what I have done by saying it. They have helped me sustain a belief in the significance of my arguments, while never relenting in their criticism. Martin Edelman has chaired my department with wisdom and charity during the past two years and has done much to sustain and reconstitute the atmosphere that has, over the years and on the whole, made the State University of New York at Albany a place of felicity. Two graduate students, Christopher Robinson and Karen Sotherland, gave the draft of the manuscript a detailed reading and offered valuable suggestions for revision. Dede Gunnell's support during this sometimes confining project has far exceeded the demands of mere justice. Page 1 Introduction The beginning is more than half the work. Plato This book is a general critique of academic political theory. The focus is on political theory, philosophy, politics and, particularly, the relationships among them. It is what should be called, I suppose, a deconstructive effort, because the purpose is basically one of destroying a number of myths that not only pervade the literature of academic political theory but have in large measure come to define it. Although in the final chapters I attempt to point beyond these myths and indicate the possibilities of political theory, my purpose is primarily to bring political theory face to face with itself and demythologize the enterprise. These myths include the beliefs that the canon of classic texts from at least Plato to Marx constitutes an actual historical tradition that explains the present; that epistemology reveals the nature of scientific and social scientific explanation and provides the foundation of scientific inquiry and knowledge; that philosophy and political theory can discover and articulate transcendental grounds of political judgment; that politics is something more than a conventional form of human action or has some essential character that explains it and endows it with value; and that academic discourse about politics is equivalent to political discourse.It is the concatenation of these myths that has caused what I will refer to as the alienation of political theory. This alienation has several analytically distinguishable dimensions, but it is basically a function of political theory's dependence on various forms of philosophical and metatheoretical discourse and its failure to come to grips with its actual relationship to politics. To
The list of books you might like
