The ethics of interpretation in political theory and intellectual history

Frazer, Michael L. ORCID: (2019) The ethics of interpretation in political theory and intellectual history. The Review of Politics, 81 (1). pp. 77-99. ISSN 0034-6705

[thumbnail of Accepted manuscript]
PDF (Accepted manuscript) - Accepted Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial.

Download (374kB) | Preview


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
University of East Anglia > Faculty of Arts and Humanities > Research Groups > Political, Social and International Studies
Related URLs:
Depositing User: LivePure Connector
Date Deposited: 23 Jul 2018 16:30
Last Modified: 22 Oct 2022 04:00
DOI: 10.1017/S0034670518000967

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item