Tools
ToolsFrazer, Michael L. (2019) The ethics of interpretation in political theory and intellectual history. The Review of Politics, 81 (1). pp. 77-99. ISSN 0034-6705
Preview |
PDF (Accepted manuscript)
- Accepted Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial. Download (374kB) | Preview |
Abstract
Scholars studying classic political texts face an important decision: Should these texts be read as artifacts of history or as sources for still-valid insights about politics today? Competing historical and “presentist” approaches to political thought do not have a methodological dispute—that is, a disagreement about the most effective scholarly means to an agreed-upon end. They instead have an ethical dispute about the respective value of competing activities that aim at different purposes. This article examines six ethical arguments, drawn primarily from the work of Quentin Skinner, in favor of the historical approach. It concludes that while both intellectual history and presentist theory are ethically justifiable, the best justification of the former enterprise is that it can help us achieve the purposes of the latter.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Faculty \ School: | Faculty of Arts and Humanities > School of Politics, Philosophy, Language and Communication Studies |
| UEA Research Groups: | Faculty of Arts and Humanities > Research Groups > Policy & Politics Faculty of Arts and Humanities > Research Groups > Political, Social and International Studies Faculty of Arts and Humanities > Research Groups > Cultural Politics, Communications & Media |
| Related URLs: | |
| Depositing User: | LivePure Connector |
| Date Deposited: | 23 Jul 2018 16:30 |
| Last Modified: | 12 Mar 2024 09:29 |
| URI: | https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/id/eprint/67817 |
| DOI: | 10.1017/S0034670518000967 |
Downloads
Downloads per month over past year
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |