Paper XI - Classical Political Philosophy (5.1)
Core Course - (CC) Credit:6
Unit 1
,Text and Interpretation (1 week)
Unit 2
Antiquity
Plato (2 weeks)
Philosophy and Politics, Virtues, Justice, Philosopher King/Queen,
Communism, Plato
on Democracy, Women and Guardianship, Philosophic Education and Good
Aristotle (2 weeks)
Forms, Virtue, man as zoon politikon, Citizenship, Justice, State and
Household,
Classification of governments
Unit 3
Interlude:
Machiavelli (2 weeks)
Vice and Virtue, Analyzing Power through Prince, Religion and morality,
Republicanism, statecraft
Unit 4
Possessive Individualism
Hobbes (2 weeks)
Human nature, State of Nature, Social Contract and role of consent, State
and sovereignty
Locke (2 weeks)
Laws of Nature, Natural Rights, Justification of Property, Right to Dissent
TEXT AND INTERPRETATIONS
,Approaches to Study Classics (Traditional)
In the field of scientific inquiry of social phenomena, an approach is concerned with the
selection of a suitable method or perspective to inquire anything that is political. It talks of –
how to inquire? And focuses to study what to inquire? To understand the text of any classic
would require both approach of text and context.
Textual Approach
In textual approach the interpreter requires read the text in simple form and understand its
meaning and language. The main objective of textual interpretation is to read the author in his
words: What he actually said? What is the objective to say? What massage he is trying to
give to the reader through his language. As Leo Struss once said the reader or interpreter need
to ‘read, reread and reflect’ upon the said book or classic. This approach always emphasis
more on the actual wording of any of these written or printed books. To understand the a,b,c
of any classical text we have to read a text ‘over and over again’ as said by Palmenatz (1963:
I, X). The meaning and context of the text can be sometime being misunderstood by the
researcher or reader. Sometimes researcher also (mis)understand the meaning of any text
written in any classics. So, the role of interpreter becomes very crucial while interpreting.
When interpretation or reading of any text is being narrowly intentioned, it leads to rise of
fundamentalism. In the words of Terence Ball, the (mis) reading of Koran by Osama Bin
laden may lead to rise of fundamentalism in Afghanistan. Similarly a narrow interpretation or
(mis)quotation is a serious challenge of interpretation.
Textual approach wants to look at ‘text’ as itself or as self sufficient substance to
understand any philosopher. For example, to understand the meaning of Leviathan, we only
have to read it again and again, if required we have to read other related text of Hobbes. It
surely says that, if some passage in the Leviathan is unclear to us, we take the help of some
other passage in the same book to understand and re-evaluate or revise the existing
interpretation. So, reading carefully and connecting to establish a meaning out of any classics
becomes the main activity of interpretation.
Contextual Approach
The textual method of studying of Classics in Western tradition of political thought came
under attack, in 1960s by the founder of ‘Cambridge School’, who argued to look at any text
or classic from emergence of its circumstances or contexts. According to them, when we look
at classics from only ‘textual’ point of view, we miss the historical context of it. That means,
the writer or philosopher do not write in their own creative framework, but usually of that
time they lived. So, that time usually depict of socio-economic context of the philosopher.
Hence, textual approach was been equally works, hand in hand with contextual approach.
Skinner (1966) Pocock (1971), Dunn (1979) and Collini (1983) are leading exponents of
contextualism or contextual approach (founders of Cambridge School). They visualized that
depending on mere textual approach is inherently weak, it overlook the historical and social
context or purpose of writing. So, contextual approach consider, every text is the result of a
conscious effort of authors or philosopher. So, ignoring the historical context of the text
would lead to an error in interpreting and understanding. Skinner popularized the method
called Speech-act theory. According to which the author’s intention could be better decoded
if one examined what the author was doing while writing something. Here, we can analyse
the intention of the author.
Context talks of environment which forced or influenced philosophers / thinkers/authors
to write such text. It indicates about the socio-economic and cultural milieu of the writer.
Sabine held that political theories of any age are the product of the social circumstances in
, which politics had operated. So, we require giving emphasis on both textual approach and
contextual approach. Now we will discuss about the views of Terence Ball.
Terence Ball’s View on Interpretation (History and the Interpretation of Texts)
Interpretation of text has many implications. Some time it is as serious as matter of difficulty.
Sometimes it is simply a deadly matter. As Terence Ball mentions because of irresponsive
interpretations, one dimensional interpretation work of Marx; writings of Nietzsche are being
misunderstood. Thus, the challenge of irresponsive and one dimensional interpretation can be
tackled by carful, contextual and pluralistic interpretations.
Therefore, the work of political theory or thought is in large to understand these classical
works which comprise an important aspect of political traditions. The political scientists are
perennially interested to understand, reflect and reread these classics. And try what is being
said by philosophers, in what situations; and why are being said in certain period of history.
So, it is important for the researcher of political scientist to read, translate and interpret any
classical text and make them understandable to the readers or students. The purpose of any
interpretation should simplify the text and context of any classics. “A good translation or
interpretation is one that diminishes the strangeness of the text, making it more familiar and
accessible to an otherwise puzzled or perplexed observer” (Ball in Kaukthas & Gaus,
2004:19). The work of interpreter is to simplify the meaning of classical text from completely
objective manner to the reader.
Schools of Interpretation
There are number of influential schools or approaches to, interpretation. Each takes a
distinctive approach to read the history of political thought, and each is highly critical of
others. Despite strong differences of their view points, Terence Ball in his article preferred a
multiple and pluralistic dimension of approach over monolithic interpretation. So, let us
discuss various approaches to read or interpret classical text:
Totalitarian Approach
It can be other way can be said as totalitarian approach to textual interpretation. There was
rise of Fascism, Nazism in 20th century Europe. Thus, there was a major shifting in
interpretation of classical books took place. While interpreting Plato’s classic Republic, the
roots of these totalitarian beliefs are being found. The behaviour of Hitler, Helicaft and the
work of Gulag of Stalin being searched in the classic wrote by Plato. As we know Plato’s
Republic all administrative, legal and executive authority were entitled to the ‘Philosopher
King’. The Philosopher King at a time becomes the source of law, executer of law and
implementer of law. Likewise in the Machiavelli’s Prince, Hobbes ‘Leviathan’ does spoke
about the totalitarian aspects had also seen Rousseau’s ‘Social Contract’ from this approach.
The characteristic of Rousseau’s ‘General Will’ can also be seen from the totalitarian aspect.
So, totalitarian approach is an influential approach to textual interpretation and views these
ideologies are rooted in the writing of early political thinker or theorist like Plato and
Rousseau.
These earlier theorist, when put into modern political theories or practices are allegedly
produced Hitler promoting Holocaust; Stalin using Gulag to eliminate bourgeoisie class. It is
therefore very important to detect and expose the philosophical ‘origins’ or ‘roots’ of modern
totalitarianism by rereading and reinterpreting earlier thinkers in the light of theorizing these
‘classical texts’.
Let us look at the proto-totalitarian themes and tendencies of early Nazism (propaganda),
their roots can be traced back in the Plato’s Perfect Republic, ruled by a Philosopher King
Core Course - (CC) Credit:6
Unit 1
,Text and Interpretation (1 week)
Unit 2
Antiquity
Plato (2 weeks)
Philosophy and Politics, Virtues, Justice, Philosopher King/Queen,
Communism, Plato
on Democracy, Women and Guardianship, Philosophic Education and Good
Aristotle (2 weeks)
Forms, Virtue, man as zoon politikon, Citizenship, Justice, State and
Household,
Classification of governments
Unit 3
Interlude:
Machiavelli (2 weeks)
Vice and Virtue, Analyzing Power through Prince, Religion and morality,
Republicanism, statecraft
Unit 4
Possessive Individualism
Hobbes (2 weeks)
Human nature, State of Nature, Social Contract and role of consent, State
and sovereignty
Locke (2 weeks)
Laws of Nature, Natural Rights, Justification of Property, Right to Dissent
TEXT AND INTERPRETATIONS
,Approaches to Study Classics (Traditional)
In the field of scientific inquiry of social phenomena, an approach is concerned with the
selection of a suitable method or perspective to inquire anything that is political. It talks of –
how to inquire? And focuses to study what to inquire? To understand the text of any classic
would require both approach of text and context.
Textual Approach
In textual approach the interpreter requires read the text in simple form and understand its
meaning and language. The main objective of textual interpretation is to read the author in his
words: What he actually said? What is the objective to say? What massage he is trying to
give to the reader through his language. As Leo Struss once said the reader or interpreter need
to ‘read, reread and reflect’ upon the said book or classic. This approach always emphasis
more on the actual wording of any of these written or printed books. To understand the a,b,c
of any classical text we have to read a text ‘over and over again’ as said by Palmenatz (1963:
I, X). The meaning and context of the text can be sometime being misunderstood by the
researcher or reader. Sometimes researcher also (mis)understand the meaning of any text
written in any classics. So, the role of interpreter becomes very crucial while interpreting.
When interpretation or reading of any text is being narrowly intentioned, it leads to rise of
fundamentalism. In the words of Terence Ball, the (mis) reading of Koran by Osama Bin
laden may lead to rise of fundamentalism in Afghanistan. Similarly a narrow interpretation or
(mis)quotation is a serious challenge of interpretation.
Textual approach wants to look at ‘text’ as itself or as self sufficient substance to
understand any philosopher. For example, to understand the meaning of Leviathan, we only
have to read it again and again, if required we have to read other related text of Hobbes. It
surely says that, if some passage in the Leviathan is unclear to us, we take the help of some
other passage in the same book to understand and re-evaluate or revise the existing
interpretation. So, reading carefully and connecting to establish a meaning out of any classics
becomes the main activity of interpretation.
Contextual Approach
The textual method of studying of Classics in Western tradition of political thought came
under attack, in 1960s by the founder of ‘Cambridge School’, who argued to look at any text
or classic from emergence of its circumstances or contexts. According to them, when we look
at classics from only ‘textual’ point of view, we miss the historical context of it. That means,
the writer or philosopher do not write in their own creative framework, but usually of that
time they lived. So, that time usually depict of socio-economic context of the philosopher.
Hence, textual approach was been equally works, hand in hand with contextual approach.
Skinner (1966) Pocock (1971), Dunn (1979) and Collini (1983) are leading exponents of
contextualism or contextual approach (founders of Cambridge School). They visualized that
depending on mere textual approach is inherently weak, it overlook the historical and social
context or purpose of writing. So, contextual approach consider, every text is the result of a
conscious effort of authors or philosopher. So, ignoring the historical context of the text
would lead to an error in interpreting and understanding. Skinner popularized the method
called Speech-act theory. According to which the author’s intention could be better decoded
if one examined what the author was doing while writing something. Here, we can analyse
the intention of the author.
Context talks of environment which forced or influenced philosophers / thinkers/authors
to write such text. It indicates about the socio-economic and cultural milieu of the writer.
Sabine held that political theories of any age are the product of the social circumstances in
, which politics had operated. So, we require giving emphasis on both textual approach and
contextual approach. Now we will discuss about the views of Terence Ball.
Terence Ball’s View on Interpretation (History and the Interpretation of Texts)
Interpretation of text has many implications. Some time it is as serious as matter of difficulty.
Sometimes it is simply a deadly matter. As Terence Ball mentions because of irresponsive
interpretations, one dimensional interpretation work of Marx; writings of Nietzsche are being
misunderstood. Thus, the challenge of irresponsive and one dimensional interpretation can be
tackled by carful, contextual and pluralistic interpretations.
Therefore, the work of political theory or thought is in large to understand these classical
works which comprise an important aspect of political traditions. The political scientists are
perennially interested to understand, reflect and reread these classics. And try what is being
said by philosophers, in what situations; and why are being said in certain period of history.
So, it is important for the researcher of political scientist to read, translate and interpret any
classical text and make them understandable to the readers or students. The purpose of any
interpretation should simplify the text and context of any classics. “A good translation or
interpretation is one that diminishes the strangeness of the text, making it more familiar and
accessible to an otherwise puzzled or perplexed observer” (Ball in Kaukthas & Gaus,
2004:19). The work of interpreter is to simplify the meaning of classical text from completely
objective manner to the reader.
Schools of Interpretation
There are number of influential schools or approaches to, interpretation. Each takes a
distinctive approach to read the history of political thought, and each is highly critical of
others. Despite strong differences of their view points, Terence Ball in his article preferred a
multiple and pluralistic dimension of approach over monolithic interpretation. So, let us
discuss various approaches to read or interpret classical text:
Totalitarian Approach
It can be other way can be said as totalitarian approach to textual interpretation. There was
rise of Fascism, Nazism in 20th century Europe. Thus, there was a major shifting in
interpretation of classical books took place. While interpreting Plato’s classic Republic, the
roots of these totalitarian beliefs are being found. The behaviour of Hitler, Helicaft and the
work of Gulag of Stalin being searched in the classic wrote by Plato. As we know Plato’s
Republic all administrative, legal and executive authority were entitled to the ‘Philosopher
King’. The Philosopher King at a time becomes the source of law, executer of law and
implementer of law. Likewise in the Machiavelli’s Prince, Hobbes ‘Leviathan’ does spoke
about the totalitarian aspects had also seen Rousseau’s ‘Social Contract’ from this approach.
The characteristic of Rousseau’s ‘General Will’ can also be seen from the totalitarian aspect.
So, totalitarian approach is an influential approach to textual interpretation and views these
ideologies are rooted in the writing of early political thinker or theorist like Plato and
Rousseau.
These earlier theorist, when put into modern political theories or practices are allegedly
produced Hitler promoting Holocaust; Stalin using Gulag to eliminate bourgeoisie class. It is
therefore very important to detect and expose the philosophical ‘origins’ or ‘roots’ of modern
totalitarianism by rereading and reinterpreting earlier thinkers in the light of theorizing these
‘classical texts’.
Let us look at the proto-totalitarian themes and tendencies of early Nazism (propaganda),
their roots can be traced back in the Plato’s Perfect Republic, ruled by a Philosopher King
