Email RIS file
Bookmark
Report an Issue

Without Foundations Justification in Political Theory

Author:
Herzog, Donald J.
Published:
Ithaca Cornell University Press 1985
Physical Description:
1 electronic resource (258 p.)
Access Online

Availability

I Want It
I Want It

Finding items...

Language Note:
English
Restrictions on Access:
Open Access Unrestricted online access
Summary:
Can political theorists justify their ideas? Do sound political theories need foundations? What constitutes a well-justified argument in political discourse? Don Herzog attempts to answer these questions by investigating the ways in which major theorists in the Anglo-American political tradition have justified their views. Making use of a wide range of primary texts, Herzog examines the work of such important theorists as Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, the utilitarians (Jeremy Bentham, J. S. Mill. Henry Sidgwick, J. C. Harsanyi, R. M. Hare, and R. B. Brandt), David Hume, and Adam Smith. Herzog argues that Hobbes, Locke, and the utilitarians fail to justify their theories because they try to ground the volatile world of politics in immutable aspects of human nature, language, theology, or rationality. Herzog concludes that the works of Adam Smith and David Hume offer illuminating examples of successful justifications. Basing their political conclusions on social contexts, not on abstract principles, Hume and Smith develop creative solutions to given problems.
Subject(s):
Other Subject(s):
ISBN:
9780801417238
9781501722998
9781501723001
9781501723018
b0h5-mz05
Collection:
OAPEN Library.
Funding Information:
National Endowment for the Humanities
Terms of Use and Reproduction:
Creative Commons https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
View MARC record | catkey: 40544940