CLASSICAL POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY

ASSIGNMENT 1

Q1. Critically evaluate the various approaches to the study of political philosophy.

INTRODUCTION

Hermeneutics, or the art of interpretation, is named after Hermes. This refers to the art of
interpretation and means to make something clear in order to announce or reveal a message. The
primary goal of interpretation is to comprehend the essence of various philosophers' texts.
Moreover, Gadamer has admitted that the art and process of interpretation is a matter of
'ontological necessity' of being human. He claims that the world we live in and the texts we read
are usually interpreted and imbued with meaning. Furthermore, in Terence Ball's opinion, the
work of political theory or thought is primarily concerned with comprehending these classical
works that comprise an important aspect of political traditions. Political scientists are perpetually
interested in understanding, reflecting on, and re-reading these famous classics in order to
understand what philosophers are saying, in what situations, and why they are saying in certain
periods of history. Thus, any interpretation's goal is to simplify the text and context of any
classic.

SCHOOLS OF INTERPRETATION

There are a 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. Thus, the following
schools/approaches of interpretation are described as follows:

A) TOTALITARIAN APPROACH

The rise of fascism and communism in the twentieth century encouraged research into the
philosophical roots of modern totalitarianism. Karl Popper's 'The Open Society and its Enemies'
is a well-known work from this perspective (1945). Popper was an Austrian Jew who fled the
Nazis in the 1930s and immigrated to New Zealand.
Furthermore, according to this viewpoint, Popper interprets Hegel's remark in the "Preface" to
the Philosophy of Right as justifying everything that is now real (or "actual") exists by necessity
and must thus be reasonable and good ("rational"). A closer examination reveals Popper's
misunderstanding. Hegel employs the term 'wirklich,' which translates as 'actual,' and refers to
'realized potential,' rather than what is "real," as Popper believes. Hegel's remark would imply
that "what is rational is that which fully actualizes its potential; and that which fully actualizes its
potential is rational".
However, Popper's misinterpretation of Hegel teaches us a larger hermeneutical lesson. It is
critical to place statements in their appropriate context, whether conceptual-philosophical or
otherwise. In this case, that means paying attention to how Hegel uses a seemingly ordinary term
in a non-ordinary or technical context.

B) MARXIAN APPROACH

The focus of analysis in the Marxian approach is 'class' and 'its inequalities.' For Marxists, the
mainstream ideas of any age are those that serve the interests of the dominant ruling class.
Furthermore, Ball refers to this general approach as "the hermeneutics of suspicion." The
interpreter's role here is to reveal the hidden socioeconomic realities that exist in society and are
noted by any philosopher in their 'classics.' For example, C. B. Macpherson attempts to conclude
in his book The Political Theory of Possessive Individual (1962) that "possessive individualism"
serves to support and legitimize the mainstays of modern capitalism-economic interest and the
institution of private property.
As a result, Marxian interpretation of text has numerous flaws. Some of them are, both Marx and
Engels belonged to the elite class, but they tried to highlight the oppressed class's problem. As a
result, the Marxist assumption that the dominant ideas of a period are those that serve the
interests of the ruling class appears to be incorrect. Second, Marxian interpretations tend to
ignore the impact of identities based on other power structures (other than class) on shaping
reality, such as caste, gender, sexualities, religion, region, and race. Even when they recognize
other people's identities, they are relegated to a secondary role in shaping reality.

C) PSYCHOANALYTIC APPROACH

Sigmund Freud, the father of psychoanalysis, famously argued in works such as The
Interpretation of Dreams and The Psychopathology of Everyday Life that human actions are
frequently influenced by wishes, desires, and fears that exist unconsciously in our minds. While
reading various classical texts, many political analysts used this approach extensively. Pitkin, for
example, read Machiavelli in 1984; Erikson, Mahatma Gandhi in 1969; and Bruce Mazlish, John
Stuart Mill in 1975.
Mill's On Liberty, as an example, is framed as a personal appeal and declaration of independence
from his strict father. This Mill may not have intended it consciously, but his unconscious desires
shaped his work.
Mazlish also attempted to interpret J.S. Mill's marriage to Harriet. Given that his mother's name
was also Harriet, this coincidence fits perfectly with what is known as the Oedipus complex in
psychoanalytic theory.
However, this approach is not without flaws. This approach is criticized because, while it can be
insightful at times, it is speculative, impressionistic, and non-falsifiable. As a result, political
scientists are less likely to use psychoanalytic approaches because they lack evidentiary
challenges.

D) FEMINIST APPROACH

Gender is the focal point of analysis in this approach, and it is used to examine political theory.
The essence of this approach is reflected in Susan Okin’s statement, “the great tradition of
political philosophy consists…of writings by men, for men, and about men”. This chasm has
prompted feminist re-readings and re-appraisals of classic works.
The first stage of this strategy began in the 1960s. During this time period, women's issues and
concerns are taking new directions in political science discourse. The works of Mary
Wollstonecraft, Emma Goldman, and John Stuart Mill were chosen for their attention to and
homage to the gender question. During the second phase of the feminist movement, the criticism
became more forceful and precise. The feminist scholars set out to expose and criticize the
misogamy that lurked in Plato's, Aristotle's, Machiavelli's, and other works. In her work 'The
Sexual Contract,' Carole Pateman, for example, emphasized how the social contract was a
fraternal contract and the welfare state was a patriarchal institution. The third phase criticized
men's essential civic virtues — power hunger, competitiveness, and rationality. It declared the
superiority of the private realm of the family over the public realm of politics, flipping the
public/private distinction on its head.
As a result, upper-class, white-skinned, educated women have dominated this approach.
Bringing forth the voices of various women (because the category of women is not monolithic) is
a challenge for this school of thought.

E) STRAUSSIAN APPROACH

This approach is based on the work of Leo Strauss, who attempted to find the eternal truth of
politics in Plato and other ancient and pre-liberal thinkers. These 'rigorous' works were set
against the 'lenient' works of modern liberal thinkers. Strauss bemoaned the eroding of normative
foundations in the face of fanaticism's ferocious winds. His perspective was influenced by his
experiences as a Jewish refugee from Nazi Germany.
After identifying the crisis, Strauss and his followers attempted to trace its roots and diagnose the
ills of liberalism, relativism, historicism, and scientism. Solutions were to be found by carefully
re-reading and deciphering the true meaning in pre-liberal texts. The Straussian approach
distinguished between 'exoteric' doctrine (intended for or likely to be understood by the general
public) and 'esoteric' doctrine (intended for or likely to be understood by only a small number of
people with specialized knowledge or interest) embedded between and hidden behind the lines.
This approach, however, is being criticized for a number of reasons. The approach is said to rely
heavily on 'insider knowledge' that is passed down to a select few. Second, by remaining in
fearful psychology and secrecy, the interpretation of texts remains 'public'.

F) POST-MODERNIST APPROACH

The post-modern approach or perspective investigates the failure of systematic philosophers and
their 'grand meta-narratives' such as Hegelianism and Marxism, which emerged from the
European Enlightenment tradition.
The postmodern sensibility is not a fixed entity. There are three major schools of thought in
postmodernism. One was heavily influenced by Nietzsche and Michel Foucault, while the other
by Derrida. The Facultian approach to interpretation seeks to expose and criticize the numerous
ways in which human beings are 'normalized' or made into subjects, thereby willingly
participating in their own subjugation (Foucault, 1980). The goal of interpretation in Derrida's
version of postmodernism is to expose and criticize the arbitrary construct a character of claims
to truth or knowledge, particularly by examining various binary oppositions or dichotomies such
as knower/Known, object/representation, true/ false through a process Derrida termed
'deconstruction.' Because of multiple readings, ambiguities within the text only grow over time.
However, there are several criticisms that can be leveled at the postmodernist perspective on
interpretation. Postmodernists are subjected to the criticism that the reader expects to hear from
the text. Sometimes not looking at any 'binary' approach leads to personalized text analysis. As a
result, multiple interpretations can sometimes lead to a rejection of any type of truth.

G) CAMBRIDGE ‘NEW HISTORY’ APPROACH

This approach can be traced back to R.G. Collingwood's work (Skinner, 2001). The Cambridge
'new historians' see textual interpretation as revealing historically variable problems to which
specific philosophers proposed specific solutions, and they deny the existence of eternal
problems. Understanding meaning necessitates an understanding of the problem at hand. In his
introduction to Locke's Two Treatises (1960), Peter Laslett places the book in its political and
historical context. It also demonstrates that the volume was written nearly a decade earlier than
previously thought, paving the way for subsequent Locke reinterpretations. This method of
historical research has been vigorously promoted. Approaches based on textbooks have been
rejected as being insufficiently historical. Political theory, according to this viewpoint, is a type
of political action. Its purpose is to warn, persuade, criticize, and frighten. Politicians have
always been involved in propaganda and persuasion. The task of textual interpretation is to
restore texts to their historical contexts and to comprehend the question(s) to which the texts
were offered as answers.

As a result, we can see that no single method will suffice to provide the answers we seek. A
variety of approaches that do not limit the range of questions we can ask is preferable. This
pluralistic approach must take into account intellectual, political, and linguistic contexts. We
must also remember that once a text is published, it takes on a life of its own. Concentrating
solely on what the author intended in a specific text ignores what other thinkers and readers had
to say about the same text. Interpretative investigations are problem-driven and dynamic in
nature. To clear our doubts, we turn to texts. These reservations can arise from anywhere, but
their interpretive solutions must be supported by rigorous scholarly criteria. Reinterpretations
and reappraisals can keep classic works alive.

THANK YOU

NAME- ASHIMA MEHRA