pol sci (1)
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)
1/21
STATE OF NATURE
State of nature is a term in political philosophy used in social contract theories to
describe the hypothetical condition of humanity before the state's foundation. In a
broader sense, the state of nature is the condition before the rule of positive
law comes into being, thus being a synonym of anarchy. The idea of the state
of nature was a part of a classical republicanism theory as a hypothetical reason of
entering a state of society by establishing a government.
Hobbes's philosophy
The concept of state of nature was posited by the 17th century English
philosopher Thomas Hobbes inLeviathan.[1]Hobbes wrote that "during the time men
live without a common power to keep them all in awe, they are in that condition
which is called war; and such a war as is of every man against every man"(Leviathan, ch. XIII). In this state any person has a natural right to do anything to
preserve his own liberty or safety, and life is "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short"
(loc. cit.). He believed that in the international arena, states behave as individuals do
in a state of nature.
Within the state of nature there is no injustice, since there is no law, excepting
certain natural precepts, the first of which is "that every man ought to endeavour
peace, as far as he has hope of obtaining it" (Leviathan, ch. XIV); and the second is
"that a man be willing, when others are so too, as far forth as for peace and defenceof himself 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 himself" (loc. cit.). From this, Hobbes develops the way out of the state of
nature into civil government by mutual contracts.
Hobbes described the concept in the Latin phrasebellum omnium contra omnes, in
his workde Cive.
Locke's view on the state of nature
John Locke considers the state of nature in hisSecond Treatise on Civil
Governmentwritten around the time of the Engagement controversy in England
during the 1680s. For Locke, "The state of Nature has a law of Nature to govern it",
and that law is Reason. Locke believes that reason teaches that "no one ought to
harm another in his life, health, liberty or possessions"; and that transgressions of
this may be punished. This view of the state of nature is partly deduced from
Christian belief (unlike Hobbes, whose philosophy is not dependent upon any prior
theology): the reason we may not harm another is that we are all the possessions of
God and do not own ourselves.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_philosophyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contracthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_statehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_republicanismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Hobbeshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_(book)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_(book)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_nature#cite_note-Leviathan-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_nature#cite_note-Leviathan-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_nature#cite_note-Leviathan-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_righthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nasty,_brutish,_and_shorthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellum_omnium_contra_omneshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellum_omnium_contra_omneshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellum_omnium_contra_omneshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Civehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Civehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Civehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lockehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Treatise_on_Civil_Governmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Treatise_on_Civil_Governmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Treatise_on_Civil_Governmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Treatise_on_Civil_Governmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engagement_controversyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engagement_controversyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Treatise_on_Civil_Governmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Treatise_on_Civil_Governmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lockehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Civehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellum_omnium_contra_omneshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nasty,_brutish,_and_shorthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_righthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_nature#cite_note-Leviathan-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_(book)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Hobbeshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_republicanismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_statehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contracthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_philosophy -
8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)
2/21
Although it may be natural to assume that Locke was responding to Hobbes, Locke
never refers to Hobbes by name, and may instead have been responding to other
writers of the day, like Robert Filmer.[2]In fact, Locke's First Treatise is entirely a
response to Filmers Patriarcha, and takes a step by step method to refuting Filmer's
theory set out in Patriarcha. The conservative party at the time had rallied behind
Filmers Patriarcha, whereas the Whigs, scared of another prosecution of anglicans
and protestants, rallied behind the theory set out by Locke in his Two Treatises of
Government; as it gives a clear theory as to why you should be allowed to overthrow
a monarchy who abuses the trust set in it by the people.
Rousseau
Hobbes's view was challenged in the eighteenth century by Jean-Jacques
Rousseau, who claimed that Hobbes was taking socialized persons and simplyimagining them living outside of the society in which they were raised. He affirmed
instead that people were neither good nor bad. Men knew neither vice nor virtue
since they had almost no dealings with each other. Their bad habits are the products
of civilization. Nevertheless the conditions of nature forced people to enter a state of
society by establishing a civil society.
Social Contract Theory:
Thomas Hobbes's Leviathan(1651)
The first modern philosopher to articulate a detailed contract theory was Thomas
Hobbes (1588-1679). According to Hobbes, the lives of individuals in the state of
nature were "nasty, brutish and short", a state where self-interest and the absence of
rights and contracts prevented the 'social', or society. Life was 'anarchic' (without
leadership/ the concept of sovereignty). Individuals in the state of nature were
apolitical and asocial. This state of nature is followed by the social contract.
The social contract was an 'occurence' during which individuals came together andceded some of their individual rights so that others would cede theirs (e.g. person A
gives up his/her right to kill person B if person B does the same). This resulted in the
establishment of society, and by extension, the state, a sovereign entity (like the
individuals, now under its rule, used to be) which was to protect these new rights
which were now to regulate societal interactions. Society was thus no longer
anarchic.
But the state system, which grew out of the social contract, was anarchic (without
leadership). Just as the individuals in the state of nature had been sovereigns andthus guided by self-interest and the absence of rights, so states now acted in their
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Filmerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_nature#cite_note-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_nature#cite_note-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_nature#cite_note-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Jacques_Rousseauhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Jacques_Rousseauhttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=State_of_society&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=State_of_society&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_societyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Hobbeshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Hobbeshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Hobbeshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Hobbeshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_societyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=State_of_society&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=State_of_society&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Jacques_Rousseauhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Jacques_Rousseauhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_nature#cite_note-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Filmer -
8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)
3/21
self-interest in competition with each other. Just like the state of nature, states were
thus bound to be in conflict because there was no sovereign over and above the
state (i.e. more powerful) capable of imposing social-contract laws.
Ius naturaleis Latin for "natural law", the laws common to all beings. Roman jurists
wondered why theius gentium(the laws which applied to foreigners and citizens
alike) was in general accepted by all people living in the Empire. Their conclusion
was that these laws made sense to a reasonable person and thus were followed. All
laws which would make sense to a normal person were called ius naturale.
Slavery for example was part of the empire-wide ius gentiumbecause slavery was
known and accepted as a fact in all parts of the known world, nevertheless slavery
does not make sense to a reasonable person. Forcing people to work for others was
not natural. So, slavery was part of the ius gentiumbut not of the ius naturale.The ius naturaleof the Roman jurists is not the same as implied by the modern
sense of natural law as something derived from pure reason. As Sir Henry Sumner
Maine puts it, "it was never thought of as founded on quite untested principles. The
notion was that it underlay existing law and must be looked for through it"
Natural law or the law of nature(Latin:lex naturalis) is a theory that posits the
existence of a law whose content is set by nature and that therefore has validity
everywhere.[1]The phrase natural lawis opposed to the positive law (which is man-
made) of a given political community, society, or nation-state, and thus can functionas a standard by which to criticize that law.[2]In natural law jurisprudence, on the
other hand, the content of positive law cannot be known without some reference to
the natural law (or something like it). Used in this way, natural law can be invoked to
criticize decisions about the statutes, but less so to criticize the law itself. Some use
natural law synonymously with natural justice or natural right (Latin ius naturale),
although most contemporary political and legal theorists separate the two.
As used by Thomas Hobbes in his treatisesLeviathanandDe Cive, natural law is
"a precept, or general rule, found out by reason, by which a man is forbidden to dothat which is destructive of his life, or takes away the means of preserving the same;
and to omit that by which he thinks it may best be preserved."
John Locke's Second Treatise of Government(1689)
John Locke's conception of the social contract differed from Hobbes' in several ways,
but retained the central notion that persons in a state of nature would willingly come
together to form a state. Locke believed that individuals in a state of nature would
have stronger moral limits on their action than accepted by Hobbes, but recognized
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latinhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ius_gentiumhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ius_gentiumhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ius_gentiumhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slaveryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lex_naturalis#cite_note-Ref-1-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lex_naturalis#cite_note-Ref-1-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lex_naturalis#cite_note-Ref-1-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation-statehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lex_naturalis#cite_note-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lex_naturalis#cite_note-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lex_naturalis#cite_note-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_justicehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latinhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Hobbeshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_(book)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_(book)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_(book)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Civehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Civehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Civehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precepthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lockehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lockehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precepthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Civehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_(book)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Hobbeshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latinhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_justicehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lex_naturalis#cite_note-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation-statehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lex_naturalis#cite_note-Ref-1-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slaveryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ius_gentiumhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin -
8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)
4/21
that people would still live in fear of one another. Locke argued that individuals would
agree to form a state that would provide a "neutral judge", and that could therefore
protect the lives, liberty, and property of those who lived within it. While Hobbes
argued for near-absolute authority, Locke argued that laws could only be legitimate if
they sought to achieve the common good. Locke also believed that people will do the
right thing as a group, and that all people have natural rights.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau's Du Contrat Social(1762)
Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778), in his influential 1762 treatiseThe Social
Contract, outlined a different version of social contract theory, based on popular
sovereignty. Although Rousseau wrote that the British were perhaps at the time the
freest people on earth, he did not approve of their representative government.
Rousseau believed that liberty was possible only where there was direct rule by thepeople as a whole in lawmaking, where popular sovereignty was indivisible
and inalienable. Citizens must, in at least some circumstances, be able to choose
together the fundamental rules by which they would live, and be able to revise those
rules on later occasions if they choose to do so - something the English people as a
whole were unable to do.
Rousseau's political theory has some points in common with Locke's individualism,
but departs from it in his development of the "luminous conception" (which he
credited to Diderot) of the general will. Rousseau argues a citizen can bean egoist and decide that his personal interest should override the collective interest.
However, as part of a collective body, the individual citizen puts aside his egoism to
create a "general will", which is popular sovereignty itself. Popular sovereignty (i.e.,
the rule of law), thus decides what is good for society as a whole, and the individual
(including the administrative head of state, who could be a monarch) must bow to it,
or be forced to bow to it:
[The social contract] can be reduced to the following terms: Each of us puts his
person and all his power in common under the supreme direction of the general will;and in a body we receive each member as an indivisible part of the whole.[3]
Rousseau's striking phrase that man must "be forced to be free"[4]should be
understood this way: since the indivisible and inalienable popular sovereignty
decides what is good for the whole, then if an individual lapses back into his ordinary
egoism and breaks the law, he will be forced to listen to what they decided as a
member of the collectivity (i.e. as citizens). Thus, the law, inasmuch as it is voted by
the people's representatives, is not a limitation of individual freedom, but its
expression; and enforcement of law, including criminal law, is not a restriction on
individual liberty, as the individual, as a citizen, explicitly agreed to be constrained if,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Jacques_Rousseauhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Contract_(Rousseau)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Contract_(Rousseau)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Contract_(Rousseau)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Contract_(Rousseau)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popular_sovereigntyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popular_sovereigntyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representative_governmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inalienablehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diderothttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_willhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egoisthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_willhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contract_theory#cite_note-2http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contract_theory#cite_note-2http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contract_theory#cite_note-2http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contract_theory#cite_note-3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contract_theory#cite_note-3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contract_theory#cite_note-3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizenhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizenhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contract_theory#cite_note-3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contract_theory#cite_note-2http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_willhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egoisthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_willhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diderothttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inalienablehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representative_governmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popular_sovereigntyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popular_sovereigntyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Contract_(Rousseau)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Contract_(Rousseau)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Jacques_Rousseau -
8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)
5/21
as a private individual, he did not respect his own will as formulated in the general
will. Because laws represent the restraints of civil freedom, they represent the leap
made from humans in the state of nature into civil society. In this sense, the law is a
civilizing force, and therefore Rousseau believed that the laws that govern a people
helped to mold their character.
MARX:
ALIENATION
in the labour process
According to Marx, alienation is a systematic result of capitalism. Marx's Theory of
Alienation is founded upon his observation that in emerging industrial productionunder capitalism, workers inevitably lose control over their lives and destinies by
being deprived of control over their actions. Workers never become autonomous,
self-realized human beings, but are directed, diverted, into the ways in which
the bourgeois want workers to behave. Alienation in capitalist societies occurs
because in work each contributes to the common wealth, but can only express this
fundamentally social aspect of individuality through a production system that is not
publicly(socially), but privately owned, and for which each individual functions, not as
a social being, but as an instrument.Marx identifies four types of alienation in labour under capitalism.[1]These include
the alienation of the worker from his or her species essence as a human being, not
a cog in a machine; alienation among workers, since capitalism reduces labour to a
commercial commodity to be traded on the market, rather than a social relationship;
alienation of the worker from the product, since its design and production are
appropriated by the capitalist class and escape the worker's control; and alienation
from the act of production itself, so that work boils down to an endless sequence of
discrete, repetitive, trivial, and meaningless motions, offering little, if any, intrinsicsatisfaction.
influence from Hegel and Feuerbach
Alienation is a foundational claim in Marxist theory. Hegel described a succession of
historic stages in the humanGeist(Spirit), by which that Spirit progresses towards
perfect self-understanding, and away from ignorance. In Marx's reaction to Hegel,
these two, idealist poles are replaced with materialist categories: spiritual ignorance
becomes alienation, and the transcendent end of history becomes man's realisation
of his species-being; triumph over alienation and establishment of an objectivelybetter society.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourgeoishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_(economics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_alienation#cite_note-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_alienation#cite_note-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_alienation#cite_note-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geisthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geisthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geisthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hegelhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Materialisthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcendence_(philosophy)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_historyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_historyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcendence_(philosophy)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Materialisthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hegelhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geisthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_alienation#cite_note-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_(economics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourgeois -
8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)
6/21
DIALECTICS:
Hegelian dialectic
Hegelian dialectic, usually presented in a three-fold manner, was stated by Heinrich
Moritz Chalybus as comprising three dialectical stages of development: a thesis,
giving rise to its reaction, an antithesis, which contradicts or negates the thesis, and
the tension between the two being resolved by means of a synthesis.
Although this model is often named after Hegel, he himself never used that specific
formulation. Hegel ascribed that terminology to Kant.[18]Carrying on Kant's
work, Fichtegreatly elaborated on the synthesis model, and popularized it.
On the other hand, Hegel did use a three-valued logical model that is very similar tothe antithesis model, but Hegel's most usual terms were: Abstract-Negative-
Concrete. Sometimes Hegel would use the terms, Immediate-Mediated-Concrete.
Hegel used these terms hundreds of times throughout his works.[19]
The formula, Thesis-Antithesis-Synthesis, does not explain why the Thesis requires
an Antithesis. However, the formula, Abstract-Negative-Concrete, suggests a flaw in
any initial thesisit is too abstract and lacks the negative of trial, error and
experience. The same applies to the formula, Immediate-Mediated-Concrete. For
Hegel, the Concrete, the Synthesis, the Absolute, must always pass through thephase of the Negative, that is, Mediation. This is the actual essence of what is
popularly called Hegelian Dialectics.
To describe the activity of overcoming the negative, Hegel also often used the
termAufhebung, variously translated into English as "sublation" or "overcoming," to
conceive of the working of the dialectic. Roughly, the term indicates preserving the
useful portion of an idea, thing, society, etc., while moving beyond its limitations.
(Jacques Derrida's preferred French translation of the term was relever).[20]
In theLogic, for instance, Hegel describes a dialectic of existence: first, existence
must be posited as pure Being (Sein); but pure Being, upon examination, is found to
be indistinguishable from Nothing (Nichts). When it is realized that what is coming
into being is, at the same time, also returning to nothing (in life, for example, one's
living is also a dying), both Being and Nothing are united as Becoming.[21]
As in the Socratic dialectic, Hegel claimed to proceed by making implicit
contradictions explicit: each stage of the process is the product of contradictions
inherent or implicit in the preceding stage. For Hegel, the whole of history is one
tremendous dialectic, major stages of which chart a progression from self-alienation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_Moritz_Chalyb%C3%A4ushttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_Moritz_Chalyb%C3%A4ushttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thesis,_antithesis,_synthesishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thesis,_antithesis,_synthesishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thesis,_antithesis,_synthesishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hegelhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hegelhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-17http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-17http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-17http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fichtehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thesis,_antithesis,_synthesishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thesis,_antithesis,_synthesishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-18http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-18http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-18http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sublationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sublationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sublationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Derridahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-19http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-19http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-19http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_of_Logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_of_Logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_of_Logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-20http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-20http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-20http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-20http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_of_Logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-19http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Derridahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sublationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-18http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thesis,_antithesis,_synthesishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thesis,_antithesis,_synthesishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fichtehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-17http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hegelhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hegelhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thesis,_antithesis,_synthesishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thesis,_antithesis,_synthesishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thesis,_antithesis,_synthesishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_Moritz_Chalyb%C3%A4ushttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_Moritz_Chalyb%C3%A4us -
8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)
7/21
as slavery to self-unification and realization as the rational, constitutional state of free
and equal citizens. The Hegelian dialectic cannot be mechanically applied for any
chosen thesis. Critics argue that the selection of any antithesis, other than the logical
negation of the thesis, is subjective. Then, if the logical negation is used as the
antithesis, there is no rigorous way to derive a synthesis. In practice, when an
antithesis is selected to suit the user's subjective purpose, the resulting
"contradictions" are rhetorical, not logical, and the resulting synthesis is not
rigorously defensible against a multitude of other possible syntheses. The problem
with the Fichtean "Thesis-Antithesis-Synthesis" model is that it implies that
contradictions or negations come from outside of things. Hegel's point is that they
are inherent in and internal to things. This conception of dialectics derives ultimately
from Heraclitus.
Hegel has outlined that the purpose of dialectics is "to study things in their own being
and movement and thus to demonstrate the finitude of the partial categories of
understanding"[22]
One important dialectical principle for Hegel is the transition from quantity to quality,
which he terms the Measure. The measure is the qualitative quantum, the quantum
is the existence of quantity.[23]
Another important principle for Hegel is the negation of the negation, which he
also terms Aufhebung(sublation): Something is only what it is in its relation toanother, but by the negation of the negation this something incorporates the
other into itself. The dialectical movement involves two moments that negate
each other, a somewhat and an another. As a result of the negation of the
negation, "something becomes an other; this other is itself somewhat; therefore
it likewise becomes an other, and so on ad infinitum".[26]Something in its
passage into other only joins with itself, it is self-related.[27]In becoming there
are two moments:[28]coming-to-be and ceasing-to-be: by sublation, i.e. negation
of the negation, being passes over into nothing, it ceases to be, but something
new shows up, is coming to be. What is sublated (aufgehoben) on the one hand
ceases to be and is put to an end, but on the other hand it is preserved and
maintained.[29]In dialectics, a totality transform itself, it is self-related.
Marxist dialectics
Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels believed Hegel was "standing on his head," and
endeavoured to put him back on his feet, ridding Hegel's logic of its orientation
towards philosophical idealism, and conceiving what is now known as materialist
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master-slave_dialectichttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rational_state&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_statehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetorichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heraclitushttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-21http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-21http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-21http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-25http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-25http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-25http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-26http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-26http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-26http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-27http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-27http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-27http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-28http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-28http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-28http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marxhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Engelshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idealismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idealismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Engelshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marxhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-28http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-27http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-26http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-25http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-21http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heraclitushttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetorichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_statehttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rational_state&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master-slave_dialectic -
8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)
8/21
or Marxist dialectics. This is what Marx had to say about the difference between
Hegel's dialectics and his own:
My dialectic method is not only different from the Hegelian, but is its direct
opposite. To Hegel, the life-process of the human brain, i.e. the process ofthinking, which, under the name of 'the Idea,' he even transforms into an
independent subject, is the demiurgos of the real world, and the real world is
only the external, phenomenal form of 'the Idea.' With me, on the contrary, the
ideal is nothing else than the material world reflected by the human mind, and
translated into forms of thought." (Capital, Volume 1, Moscow, 1970, p. 29).
Nevertheless, Marx "openly avowed [himself] the pupil of that mighty thinker"
and even "coquetted with modes of expression peculiar to him."[30]
In the work of Marx and Engels the dialectical approach to the study of history
became intertwined with historical materialism, the school of thought exemplified
by the works of Marx, Engels, and Lenin. (Marx himself never referred to
"historical materialism.") A dialectical methodology came to be seen as the vital
foundation for any Marxist politics, through the work of Karl Korsch, Georg
Lukcs and certain members of the Frankfurt School. Under Stalin, Marxist
dialectics became synonymous with what was called "diamat" (short
for dialectical materialism). The "diamat" was a social theory coined by 19th
century philosophy Joseph Dietzgen which emphasized commodities and theeffects of their exchange over time. Dietzgen used his theory sparingly to
explain the nature of socialism and social development, but it was never
researched academically until the Soviet Union indoctrinated the philosophy.
Some Soviet academics, most notably Evald Ilyenkov, continued with
unorthodox philosophical studies of the Marxist dialectic, as did a number of
thinkers in the West. One of the best known North American dialectical
philosophers is Bertell Ollman, Professor of Political Science at New York
University.Engels argued that all of nature is dialectical. In Anti-Dhring he contends that
negation of negation is
A very simple process which is taking place everywhere and every day, which
any child can understand as soon as it is stripped of the veil of mystery in which
it was enveloped by the old idealist philosophy.[32]
In Dialectics of Nature, Engels states,
Probably the same gentlemen who up to now have decried the transformation ofquantity into quality as mysticism and incomprehensible transcendentalism will
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxisthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-29http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-29http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-29http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_materialismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Korschhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georg_Luk%C3%A1cshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georg_Luk%C3%A1cshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankfurt_Schoolhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalinhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectical_materialismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Dietzgenhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviethttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evald_Ilyenkovhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertell_Ollmanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Universityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Universityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-D%C3%BChringhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-31http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-31http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-31http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectics_of_Naturehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectics_of_Naturehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-31http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-D%C3%BChringhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Universityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Universityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertell_Ollmanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evald_Ilyenkovhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviethttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Dietzgenhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectical_materialismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalinhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankfurt_Schoolhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georg_Luk%C3%A1cshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georg_Luk%C3%A1cshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Korschhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_materialismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-29http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxist -
8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)
9/21
now declare that it is indeed something quite self-evident, trivial, and
commonplace, which they have long employed, and so they have been taught
nothing new. But to have formulated for the first time in its universally valid form
a general law of development of nature, society, and thought, will always remain
an act of historic importance.[33]
Marxists view dialectics as a framework for development in which contradiction
plays the central role as the source of development. This is perhaps best
exemplified in Marx's Capital, which outlines two of his central theories: that of
the theory of surplus value and the materialist conception of history.
In Capital, Marx had the following to say about his dialectical methodology:
In its rational form it is a scandal and abomination to bourgeoisdom and its
doctrinaire professors, because it includes in its comprehension an affirmativerecognition of the existing state of things, at the same time also, the recognition
of the negation of that state, of its inevitable breaking up; because it regards
every historically developed social form as in fluid movement, and therefore
takes into account its transient nature not less than its momentary existence;
because it lets nothing impose upon it, and is in its essence critical and
revolutionary.[34]
At the heart of Marxist dialectics is the idea of contradiction, with class struggle
playing the central role in social and political life. Marx and subsequent Marxists
also identify other historically important contradictions, such as those between
mental and manual labor and town and country. Contradiction is the key to all
other categories and principles of dialectical development: development by
passage of quantitative change into qualitative ones, interruption of
gradualness, leaps, negation of the initial moment of development and negation
of this very negation, and repetition at a higher level of some of the features and
aspects of the original state.
PLATO THE STATE
Plato's philosophical views had many societal implications, especially on the idea of
an ideal state or government. There is some discrepancy between his early and later
views. Some of the most famous doctrines are contained in the Republicduring his
middle period, as well as in theLawsand the Statesman. However, because Plato
wrote dialogues, it is assumed that Socrates is often speaking for Plato. This
assumption may not be true in all cases.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-32http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-32http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-32http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-33http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-33http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-33http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_statehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_(dialogue)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_(dialogue)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_(dialogue)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_(dialogue)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_statehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-33http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-32 -
8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)
10/21
Plato, through the words of Socrates, asserts that societies have a tripartite class
structure corresponding to the appetite/spirit/reason structure of the individual soul.
The appetite/spirit/reason stand for different parts of the body. The body parts
symbolize the castes of society.[30]
ProductiveWhich represents the abdomen. (Workers) the labourers,
carpenters, plumbers, masons, merchants, farmers, ranchers, etc. These
correspond to the "appetite" part of the soul.
ProtectiveWhich represents the chest. (Warriors or Guardians) those who are
adventurous, strong and brave; in the armed forces. These correspond to the
"spirit" part of the soul.
GoverningWhich represents the head. (Rulers or Philosopher Kings) those
who are intelligent, rational, self-controlled, in love with wisdom, well suited tomake decisions for the community. These correspond to the "reason" part of the
soul and are very few.
According to this model, the principles of Athenian democracy (as it existed in his
day) are rejected as only a few are fit to rule. Instead of rhetoric and persuasion,
Plato says reason and wisdom should govern.
Plato describes these "philosopher kings" as "those who love the sight of truth"
(Republic475c) and supports the idea with the analogy of a captain and his ship or a
doctor and his medicine. According to him, sailing and health are not things that
everyone is qualified to practice by nature. A large part of the Republicthen
addresses how the educational system should be set up to produce these
philosopher kings.
However, it must be taken into account that the ideal city outlined in the Republicis
qualified by Socrates as the ideal luxuriouscity, examined to determine how it is that
injustice and justice grow in a city (Republic372e). According to Socrates, the "true"
and "healthy" city is instead the one first outlined in book II of the Republic, 369c
372d, containing farmers, craftsmen, merchants, and wage-earners, but lacking the
guardian class of philosopher-kings as well as delicacies such as "perfumed oils,
incense, prostitutes, and pastries", in addition to paintings, gold, ivory, couches, a
multitude of occupations such as poets and hunters, and war.
In addition, the ideal city is used as an image to illuminate the state of one's soul, or
the will, reason, and desires combined in the human body. Socrates is attempting to
make an image of a rightly ordered human, and then later goes on to describe the
different kinds of humans that can be observed, from tyrants to lovers of money in
various kinds of cities. The ideal city is not promoted, but only used to magnify the
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plato#cite_note-29http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plato#cite_note-29http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plato#cite_note-29http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athenian_democracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_willhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpersonal_attractionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpersonal_attractionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_willhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athenian_democracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plato#cite_note-29 -
8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)
11/21
different kinds of individual humans and the state of their soul. However,
the philosopher king image was used by many after Plato to justify their personal
political beliefs. The philosophic soul according to Socrates has reason, will, and
desires united in virtuous harmony. A philosopher has the moderate love
for wisdom and the courage to act according to wisdom. Wisdom is knowledge about
the Good or the right relations between all that exists.
Wherein it concerns states and rulers, Plato has made interesting arguments. For
instance he asks which is better - a bad democracy or a country reigned by a tyrant.
He argues that it is better to be ruled by a bad tyrant, than be a bad democracy
(since here all the people are now responsible for such actions, rather than one
individual committing many bad deeds.) This is emphasised within theRepublicas
Plato describes the event of mutiny onboard a ship.[31]Plato suggests the ships crew
to be in line with the democratic rule of many and the captain, although inhibited
through ailments, the tyrant. Plato's description of this event is parallel to that of
democracy within the state and the inherent problems that arise.
According to Plato, a state which is made up of different kinds of souls, will overall
decline from an aristocracy (rule by the best) to a timocracy (rule by the honorable),
then to an oligarchy (rule by the few), then to a democracy (rule by the people), and
finally to tyranny (rule by one person, rule by a tyrant)
ARISTOTLE MATTER AND FORM
Substance, potentiality and actuality
Aristotle examines the concept of substance and essence (ousia) in his Metaphysics,
Book VII and he concludes that a particular substance is a combination of both
matter and form. As he proceeds to the book VIII, he concludes that the matter of the
substance is the substratum or the stuff of which it is composed, e.g. the matter of
the house are the bricks, stones, timbers etc., or whatever constitutes
the potentialhouse. While the form of the substance, is the actualhouse, namely
'covering for bodies and chattels' or any other differentia (see also predicables). The
formula that gives the components is the account of the matter, and the formula that
gives the differentia is the account of the form.[22]
With regard to the change (kinesis) and its causes now, as he defines in
his Physics and On Generation and Corruption 319b-320a, he distinguishes the
coming to be from: 1) growth and diminution, which is change in quantity; 2)
locomotion, which is change in space; and 3) alteration, which is change in quality.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosopher_kinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moderatehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisdomhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Couragehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodness_and_value_theoryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plato#cite_note-30http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plato#cite_note-30http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plato#cite_note-30http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristocracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timocracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligarchyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyrannyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ousiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ousiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ousiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Material_substratumhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genus-differentia_definitionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predicableshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotle#cite_note-21http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotle#cite_note-21http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotle#cite_note-21http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinesishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinesishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinesishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_(Aristotle)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Generation_and_Corruptionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Generation_and_Corruptionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_(Aristotle)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinesishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotle#cite_note-21http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predicableshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genus-differentia_definitionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Material_substratumhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ousiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyrannyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligarchyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timocracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristocracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plato#cite_note-30http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodness_and_value_theoryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Couragehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisdomhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moderatehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosopher_king -
8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)
12/21
The coming to be is a change where nothing persists of which the resultant is a
property. In that particular change he introduces the concept of potentiality (dynamis)
and actuality (entelecheia) in association with the matter and the form.
Referring to potentiality, this is what a thing is capable of doing, or being acted upon,if it is not prevented by something else. For example, the seed of a plant in the soil is
potentially (dynamei) plant, and if is not prevented by something, it will become a
plant. Potentially beings can either 'act' (poiein) or 'be acted upon' (paschein), which
can be either innate or learned. For example, the eyes possess the potentiality of
sight (innate being acted upon), while the capability of playing the flute can be
possessed by learning (exercise acting).
Actuality is the fulfillment of the end of the potentiality. Because the end (telos) is the
principle of every change, and for the sake of the end exists potentiality, thereforeactuality is the end. Referring then to our previous example, we could say that
actuality is when the seed of the plant becomes a plant.
" For that for the sake of which a thing is, is its principle, and the becoming is for the
sake of the end; and the actuality is the end, and it is for the sake of this that the
potentiality is acquired. For animals do not see in order that they may have sight, but
they have sight that they may see."[23]
In conclusion, the matter of the house is its potentiality and the form is its actuality.
The formal cause (aitia) then of that change from potential to actual house, is
the reason (logos) of the house builder and the final cause is the end, namely the
house itself. Then Aristotle proceeds and concludes that the actuality is prior to
potentiality in formula, in time and in substantiality.
With this definition of the particular substance (i.e., matter and form), Aristotle tries to
solve the problem of the unity of the beings, e.g., what is that makes the man one?
Since, according to Plato there are two Ideas: animal and biped, how then is man a
unity? However, according to Aristotle, the potential being (matter) and the actual
one (form) are one and the same thing.
CONCEPTS
IDEOLOGY- LEFT/RIGHT
Historical origin of the terms
The termsRightandLeftrefer to political affiliations which originated early in
the French Revolutionary era of 1789-1796, and referred originally to the seatingarrangements in the various legislative bodies of France. The aristocracy sat on the
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entelecheiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entelecheiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entelecheiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Poiein&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Poiein&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Poiein&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Paschein&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Paschein&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Paschein&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotle#cite_note-22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotle#cite_note-22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotle#cite_note-22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_causehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_causehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_politicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_politicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_politicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_politicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_politicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_politicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_the_French_Revolution#Governmental_structureshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristocracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristocracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_the_French_Revolution#Governmental_structureshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_politicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_politicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_causehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_causehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotle#cite_note-22http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Paschein&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Poiein&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entelecheiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamis -
8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)
13/21
right of the Speaker(traditionally the seat of honor) and the commoners sat on the
Left, hence the terms Right-wing politics and Left-wing politics.
Originally, the defining point on the ideological spectrum was theancien rgime("old
order"). "The Right" thus implied support for aristocratic or royal interests, and thechurch, while "The Left" implied support for republicanism, secularism and civil
liberties.[2]Because the political franchise at the start of the revolution was relatively
narrow, the original "Left" represented mainly the interests of the bourgeoisie, the
rising capitalist class. At that time, support for laissez-faire capitalism and Free
markets were counted as being on the left; today in most Western countries these
views would be characterized as being on the Right.
As the franchise expanded over the next several years, it became clear that there
was something to the left of that original "Left": the precursorsof socialism and communism, advocating the interests of workers and peasants.
Bureaucracy
Bureaucracy is the collective organizational structure, procedures, protocols, and
set of regulations in place to manage activity, usually in large organizations and
government. As opposed to adhocracy, it is represented by standardized procedure(rule-following) that guides the execution of most or all processes within the body;
formal division of powers; hierarchy; and relationships, intended to anticipate needs
and improve efficiency.
Bureaucracy is a concept in sociology and political science referring to the way that
the administrative execution and enforcement of legal rules are socially organized.
Four structural concepts are central to any definition of bureaucracy:
1. a well-defined division of administrative labour among persons and offices,
2. a personnel system with consistent patterns of recruitment and stable linear
careers,
3. a hierarchy among offices, such that the authority and status are differentially
distributed among actors, and
4. formal and informal networks that connect organizational actors to one
another through flows of information and patterns of cooperation.
Examples of everyday bureaucracies include governments, armed
forces, corporations, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), intergovernmental
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speakerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commonershttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_politicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_politicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancien_r%C3%A9gimehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancien_r%C3%A9gimehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancien_r%C3%A9gimehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republicanismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secularismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_libertyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_libertyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_spectrum#cite_note-Knapp-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_spectrum#cite_note-Knapp-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_franchisehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourgeoisiehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourgeoisiehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laissez-faire_capitalismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_markethttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_markethttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffragehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organizational_structurehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actionshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protocolhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulationshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Managementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adhocracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armed_forcehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armed_forcehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-governmental_organizationshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intergovernmental_organizationshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intergovernmental_organizationshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-governmental_organizationshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armed_forcehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armed_forcehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adhocracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Managementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulationshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protocolhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actionshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organizational_structurehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffragehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_markethttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_markethttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laissez-faire_capitalismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourgeoisiehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourgeoisiehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_franchisehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_spectrum#cite_note-Knapp-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_libertyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_libertyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secularismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republicanismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancien_r%C3%A9gimehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_politicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_politicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commonershttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speaker -
8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)
14/21
organizations (IGOs),hospitals, courts, ministries, social clubs, sports
leagues, professional associations and academic institutions.
Max Weber
Max Weber has probably been one of the most influential users of the word inits social science sense. He is well-known for his study of bureaucratization of
society; many aspects of modern public administration go back to him; a classic,
hierarchically organized civil service of the continental type is if perhaps
mistakenly called Weberian civil serviceseveral different years between 1818 and
1860, prior to Weber's birth in 1864.
Weber described the ideal type bureaucracy in positive terms, considering it to be a
more rational and efficient form of organization than the alternatives that preceded it,
which he characterized ascharismatic dominationandtraditional domination.According to his terminology, bureaucracy is part of legal domination. However, he
also emphasized that bureaucracy becomes inefficient when a decision must be
adopted to an individual case.
According to Weber, the attributes of modern bureaucracy include its impersonality,
concentration of the means of administration, a leveling effect on social and
economic differences and implementation of a system of authority that is practically
indestructible.
Weber's analysis of bureaucracy concerns:
the historical and administrative reasons for the process of bureaucratization
(especially in the Western civilisation)
the impact of the rule of law upon the functioning of bureaucratic organisations
the typical personal orientation and occupational position of a bureaucratic
officials as a status group
the most important attributes and consequences of bureaucracy in the modern
world
A bureaucratic organization is governed by the following seven principles:
1. official business is conducted on a continuous basis
2. official business is conducted with strict accordance to the following rules:
1. the duty of each official to do certain types of work is delimited in terms
of impersonal criteria
2. the official is given the authority necessary to carry out his assigned
functions
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intergovernmental_organizationshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hospitalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Courthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_(government_department)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_clubshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sports_leaguehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sports_leaguehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_associationshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_institutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Weberhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_administrationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_servicehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continentalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideal_typehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charismatic_dominationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charismatic_dominationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charismatic_dominationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditional_dominationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditional_dominationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditional_dominationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_dominationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_worldhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Personal_orientation&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Occupational_position&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_grouphttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_grouphttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Occupational_position&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Personal_orientation&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_worldhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_dominationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditional_dominationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charismatic_dominationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideal_typehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continentalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_servicehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_administrationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Weberhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_institutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_associationshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sports_leaguehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sports_leaguehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_clubshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_(government_department)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Courthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hospitalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intergovernmental_organizations -
8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)
15/21
3. the means of coercion at his disposal are strictly limited and conditions
of their use strictly defined
3. every official's responsibilities and authority are part of a vertical hierarchy of
authority, with respective rights of supervision and appeal
4. officials do not own the resources necessary for the performance of their
assigned functions but are accountable for their use of these resources
5. official and private business and income are strictly separated
6. offices cannot be appropriated by their incumbents (inherited, sold, etc.)
7. official business is conducted on the basis of written documents
A bureaucratic official:
is personally free and appointed to his position on the basis of conduct
exercises the authority delegated to him in accordance with impersonal rules, and
his or her loyalty is enlisted on behalf of the faithful execution of his official duties
appointment and job placement are dependent upon his or her technical
qualifications
administrative work is a full-time occupation
work is rewarded by a regular salary and prospects of advancement in a lifetime
career
An official must exercise his or her judgment and his or her skills, but his or her dutyis to place these at the service of a higher authority; ultimately he/she is responsible
only for the impartial execution of assigned tasks and must sacrifice his or her
personal judgment if it runs counter to his or her official duties.
Weber's work has been continued by many, like Robert Michels with his Iron Law of
Oligarchy.
Criticism
As Max Weber himself noted, real bureaucracy will be less optimal and effective than
his ideal type model. Each of Weber's seven principles can degenerate:[citation needed]
Competences can be unclear and used contrary to the spirit of the law;
sometimes a decision itself may be considered more important than its effect;
Nepotism, corruption, political infighting and other degenerations can counter the
rule of impersonality and can create a recruitment and promotion system not
based on meritocracy but rather onoligarchy;
Even a non-degenerated bureaucracy can be affected by common problems:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Michelshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Law_of_Oligarchyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Law_of_Oligarchyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_neededhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_neededhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_neededhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nepotismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligarchyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligarchyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nepotismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_neededhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Law_of_Oligarchyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Law_of_Oligarchyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Michels -
8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)
16/21
Overspecialization, making individual officials not aware of larger consequences
of their actions
Rigidity and inertia of procedures, making decision-making slow or even
impossible when facing some unusual case, and similarly delaying change,
evolution and adaptation of old procedures to new circumstances;
A phenomenon of group thinking- zealotry, loyalty and lack of critical
thinking regarding the organisation which is perfectand always correctby
definition, making the organisation unable to change and realise its own mistakes
and limitations;
Disregard for dissenting opinions, even when such views suit the available data
better than the opinion of the majority;
A phenomenon ofCatch-22(named after a famous book by Joseph Heller) - as
bureaucracy creates more and more rules and procedures, their complexity rises
and coordination diminishes, facilitating creation
of contradictory and recursive rules, as described by the saying "the bureaucracy
is expanding to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy".
Not allowing people to use common sense, as everything must be as is written by
the law.
SOVEREIGNITY
Sovereignty is the quality of having supreme, independent authority over a territory.
It can be found in a power to rule and make law that rests on a political fact for which
no purely legal explanation can be provided. The concept has been discussed,
debated and questioned throughout history, from the time of the Romans through to
the present day, although it has changed in its definition, concept, and application
throughout, especially during the Age of Enlightenment. The current notion of state
sovereignty was laid down in the Treaty of Westphalia (1648), which, in relation
to states, codified the basic principles of territorial integrity, border inviolability, and
supremacy of the state (rather than the Church). A sovereign is a supreme
lawmaking authority.
A political viewpoint "that sovereignty is vested not in the people but in the national
state, and that all individuals and associations exist only to enhance the power, the
prestige, and the well-being of the state. The fascist concept of statism, which as
seen as synonymous with the concept of nation, and corporatism repudiates
individualism and exalts the nation as an organic body headed by the Supreme
Leader and nurtured by unity, force, and discipline.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_thinkinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_thinkinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catch-22_(logic)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catch-22_(logic)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catch-22_(logic)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catch-22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Hellerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contradictionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recursionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_Enlightenmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_of_Westphaliahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_statehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_integrityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_philosophyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereigntyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popular_sovereigntyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popular_sovereigntyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereigntyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_philosophyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_integrityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_statehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_of_Westphaliahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_Enlightenmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recursionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contradictionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Hellerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catch-22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catch-22_(logic)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_thinkinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_thinking -
8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)
17/21
The key element of sovereignty in the legalistic sense is that
of exclusivity of jurisdiction. Specifically, when a decision is made by a sovereign
entity, it cannot generally be overruled by a higher authority, usually another state.
Internal sovereignty is the relationship between a sovereign power and its ownsubjects. A central concern is legitimacy: by what right does a political body (or
individual) exercise authority over its subjects? Possible answers include: by
the divine right of kings or by social contract (popular sovereignty).
External sovereignty concerns the relationship between a sovereign power and
other states.
AUTHORITY
The definition of authority in contemporary social science is a matter of debate.
According to Michaels, in the Encyclopaedia of Social Sciences, authority is the
capacity, innate or acquired for exercising ascendancy over a group. Other
scientists, however, argue that authority is not a capacity but a relationship. It is
sanctioned power, institutionalized power.
In political philosophy, the jurisdiction of political authority, the location of
sovereignty, the balancing of freedom and authority (cf. Cristi 2005), and the
requirements of political obligations have been core questionsfrom Plato and Aristotle to the present. In many democractic societies, there is an
ongoing discussion regarding the legitimate extent of governmental authority in
general. In the United States, for instance, there is a widespread belief that the
political system as it was instituted by the Founding Fathers should accord the
populace as much freedom as reasonable, and that government should limit its
authority accordingly.
Max Weber, in his sociological work, identified and distinguished three types of
legitimate domination (Herrschaftin German, which generally means 'domination' or'rule'), that have sometimes been rendered in English translation as types of
authority, because domination isn't seen as a political concept in the first place.
Weber defined domination (authority) as the chance of commands being obeyed by
a specifiable group of people. Legitimate authority is that which is recognized as
legitimate and justified by both the ruler and the ruled.
Weber divided legitimate authority into three types:
The first type discussed by Weber isRational-legal authority. It is that form ofauthority which depends for its legitimacy on formal rules and established laws of
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jurisdictionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legitimacy_(political_science)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_right_of_kingshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contracthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popular_sovereigntyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotlehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Weberhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominancehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rational-legal_authorityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rational-legal_authorityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rational-legal_authorityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legitimacy_(political)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legitimacy_(political)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rational-legal_authorityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominancehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Weberhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotlehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popular_sovereigntyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contracthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_right_of_kingshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legitimacy_(political_science)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jurisdiction -
8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)
18/21
the state, which are usually written down and are often very complex. The power
of the rational legal authority is mentioned in the constitution. Modern societies
depend on legal-rational authority. Government officials are the best example of
this form of authority, which is prevalent all over the world.
The second type of authority isTraditional authority, which derives from long-
established customs, habits and social structures. When power passes from one
generation to another, then it is known as traditional authority. The right of
hereditary monarchs to rule furnishes an obvious example. The Tudor dynasty in
England and the ruling families of Mewar, in Rajasthan (India) are some
examples of traditional authority.
The third form of authority isCharismatic authority. Here, the charisma of theindividual or the leader plays an important role. Charismatic authority is that
authority which is derived from "the gift of grace" or when the leader claims that
his authority is derived from a "higher power" (e.g. God or natural law or rights) or
"inspiration", that is superior to both the validity of traditional and rational-legal
authority and followers accept this and are willing to follow this higher or inspired
authority, in the place of the authority that they have hitherto been following.
Some of the most prominent examples of charismatic authority can be politicians
or leaders, who come from a movie or entertainment background. These people
become successful, because they use their grace and charm to get more votes
during elections. Examples in this regard can be NT Rama Rao, a matinee idol,
who went on to become one of the most powerful Chief Ministers of Andhra
Pradesh.
History has witnessed several social movements or revolutions, against a system of
traditional or legal-rational authority, which are usually started by Charismatic
authorities. What distinguishes authority, from coercion, force and power on the one
hand and leadership, persuasion and influence on the other hand, is legitimacy.
Superiors feel that they have a right to issue commands; subordinates perceive an
obligation to obey. Social scientists agree that authority is but one of several
resources available, to incumbents in formal positions. For example, a Head of State
is dependent upon a similar nesting of authority. His legitimacy must be
acknowledged, not just by citizens, but by those who control other valued resources:
his immediate staff, his cabinet, military leaders and in the long run, the
administration and political apparatus of the entire society.
LIBERALISM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditional_authorityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditional_authorityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditional_authorityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tudor_dynastyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajasthanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charismatic_authorityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charismatic_authorityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charismatic_authorityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andhra_Pradeshhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andhra_Pradeshhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_movementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coercionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forcehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persuasionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_influencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_influencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persuasionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forcehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coercionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_movementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andhra_Pradeshhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andhra_Pradeshhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charismatic_authorityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajasthanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tudor_dynastyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditional_authority -
8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)
19/21
is the belief in the importance of individual freedom. This belief is widely accepted
today throughout the world, and was recognized as an important value by many
philosophers throughout history. Modern liberalism has its roots in the Age of
Enlightenment and rejects many foundational assumptions that dominated most
earlier theories of government, such as the Divine Right of Kings, hereditary status,
and established religion. John Locke is often credited with the philosophical
foundations of modern liberalism. He wrote "no one ought to harm another in his life,
health, liberty, or possessions."
The philosophy of classical liberalism in the Libertarian sense of the phrase includes
a belief in rational self-interest, property rights, natural rights, civil liberties, individual
freedom, equality under the law,limited government, and free markets.
Classical liberalism places a particular emphasis on the sovereignty of the individual,with private property rights being seen as essential to individual liberty. This forms
the philosophical basis for laissez-faire public policy. The ideology of the
original classical liberalsargued against direct democracy "for there is nothing in the
bare idea of majority rule to show that majorities will always respect the rights of
property or maintain rule of law.
Classical liberalism holds that individual rights are natural, inherent, or inalienable,
and exist independently of government. Thomas Jefferson called theseinalienable
rights: "...rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limitsdrawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the
law', because law is often but the tyrants will, and always so when it violates the
rights of the individual."[25]For classical liberalism, rights are of anegativenature
rights that require that other individuals (and governments) refrain from interfering
with individual liberty, whereas social liberalism (also called modern
liberalismor welfare liberalism) holds that individuals have a right to be provided with
certain benefits or services by others.[26]Unlike social liberals, classical liberals are
"hostile to the welfare state."[11]They do not have an interest in material equality but
only in "equality before the law."[27]Classical liberalism is critical of social liberalism
and takes offense atgroup rights being pursued at the expense of individual rights.
DEMOCRACY
Democracy is a political government either carried out by the people (direct
democracy), or the power to govern is granted to elected representatives
(Representative democracy).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_Enlightenmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_Enlightenmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundationalismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_Right_of_Kingshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_religionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lockehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Property_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_libertieshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equality_under_the_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited_governmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_marketshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereignty_of_the_individualhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_propertyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_democracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inalienable_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inalienable_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inalienable_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inalienable_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism#cite_note-24http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism#cite_note-24http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism#cite_note-24http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_and_positive_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_and_positive_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_and_positive_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_liberalismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism#cite_note-Kelley-25http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism#cite_note-Kelley-25http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism#cite_note-Kelley-25http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_statehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism#cite_note-Ryan-10http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism#cite_note-Ryan-10http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism#cite_note-Ryan-10http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Material_equalityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equality_before_the_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism#cite_note-26http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism#cite_note-26http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism#cite_note-26http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individual_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representative_democracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representative_democracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individual_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism#cite_note-26http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equality_before_the_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Material_equalityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism#cite_note-Ryan-10http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_statehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism#cite_note-Kelley-25http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_liberalismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_and_positive_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism#cite_note-24http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inalienable_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inalienable_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_democracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_propertyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereignty_of_the_individualhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_marketshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited_governmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equality_under_the_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_libertieshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Property_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lockehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_religionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_Right_of_Kingshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundationalismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_Enlightenmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_Enlightenment -
8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)
20/21
Majority rule is a decision rule that selects one of two alternatives, based on which
has more than half the votes. It is the binary decision rule used most often in
influential decision-making bodies, including the legislatures of democratic nations.
Some scholars have recommended against the use of majority rule, at least under
certain circumstances, due to an ostensible trade-off between the benefits of majority
rule and other values important to a democratic society. Most famously, it has been
argued that majority rule might lead to a "tyranny of the majority", and the use of
supermajoritarian rules and constitutional limits on government power have been
recommended to mitigate these effects. Recently some voting theorists have argued
that majority rule may actually be the best rule to protect minorities.
Participatory democracy, with subtype direct democracy, is a process emphasizing
the broad participation of constituents in the direction and operation of political
systems. Etymological roots of democracy (Greekdemosandkratos) imply that the
people are in power and thus that all democracies are participatory. However,
traditionalrepresentative democracy tends to limit citizen participation to voting,
leaving actual governance to politicians.[citation needed]
Participatory democracy strives to create opportunities for all members of a political
group to make meaningful contributions to decision-making, and seeks to broaden
the range of people who have access to such opportunities. Because so much
information must be gathered for the overall decision-making process to succeed,
technology may provide important forces leading to the type
of empowerment needed for participatory models, especially those technological
tools that enable community narratives and correspond to the accretion of
knowledge. Effectively increasing the scale of participation, and translating small but
effective participation groups into small world networks, are areas currently being
studied.
Aggregative democracyuses democratic processes to solicit citizens preferences and then
aggregate them together to determine what social policies society should adopt. Therefore,
proponents of this view hold that democratic participation should primarily focus onvoting, where
the policy with the most votes gets implemented. There are different variants of this:
Under minimalism, democracy is a system of government in which citizens give teams of
political leaders the right to rule in periodic elections. According to this minimalist conception,
citizens cannot and should not rule because, for example, on most issues, most of the time,
they have no clear views or their views are not well-founded.Joseph Schumpeterarticulated
this view most famously in his book Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy.[65]
Contemporary
proponents of minimalism includeWilliam H. Riker,Adam Przeworski,Richard Posner.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majorityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_democracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Participation_(decision_making)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demoshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demoshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demoshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kratoshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kratoshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kratoshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representative_democracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Votinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governancehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politicianhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_neededhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_neededhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_