final exam

course outline

texts

Grades

Topics & Readings    (1st term)

Topics (2nd Term)

On-Line Readings

essays

 

political science 210 (section C1)

 

The History of (Western) Political Thought

 

2007-08 :   MWF 1-2 pm

 

Don Carmichael (Don.Carmichael@ualberta.ca)

 

Office:  11‑28 Tory

Phone:  (780) - 492‑5390  

Office Hours (1st term):  Mon - Wed, 2:15 - 3:30 and by appointment.

 

 

Notes on the Final Exam

 

The final exam will have two parts as outlined further below: (1) a critical assessment of one of the theorists and (2) some passages for interpretation (as on the December mid-term).  There will be NO questions on Aristotle or on Cicero-Al-farabi-Aquinas-Machiavelli.

 

You may bring any materials/supports to the exam you want (except for laptops).  You will have 3 hours for the exam, but you should be able to finish well before that.

 

 

Part 1:   Critical assessment.  Here, you will be asked to write a critical assessment of one of the theorists on the course (note the exceptions above).  There will be no choice here.   

 

Your answer should

 

(a)   outline the important parts of his theory,

 

(b)   indicate the strengths and weakness of his theory, explaining why they are strengths and weaknesses, and

 

(c)  assess his claim to be considered a major political thinker

 

 

Part 2  Interpretations. (as on the Dec mid term).  There will be some choices here

 

Your interpretation should explain (1) the meaning of the passage in its context and (2) its significance in the work as a whole. If you believe the passage can be understood in more than one way, explain the different possible interpretations and their significances.

 

Note that you are not asked merely to explain what the passage means on its own.  In explaining its significance in the work as a whole, you might show that:

 

(a)  the passage is logically essential (the work as a whole is arguing a position in a certain number of steps; and this is one of the essential steps); or

 

(b)  the passage is crucial in some different way, (a reader couldn’t possibly understand the work as a whole if s/he didn’t understand this passage correctly), or

 

(c)  the passage means more when it is understood in the context of the rest of the work than it does when read just on its own.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Course Outline

This course is an introduction to political philosophy, conducted as a critical examination of some of the major classical writings in the history of western political thought. Although some effort will be made to relate these writings to their historical contexts, they will be used primarily as important and still relevant reflections on central questions of political life, and students will be encouraged to use these writings to develop their own understandings of these questions.

This section of the course will be discussion-oriented.  There will be regular seminars on Fridays and, despite the size of the class, student discussion will be invited in the lecture classes.  As part of this focus on discussion, the course will include instruction in the skills of effective expression and argument.  Students are invited to propose special projects and to suggest ways in which the course might be improved over the year.

 

The Work

 

Students in this course are not expected to have any background in philosophy or theoretical work.  On the contrary, the course is an introduction to the subject; and a major priority of the course is to teach students how to do political theory -- and enjoy it.

 

The material covered in this course must be studied in a particular way: it calls for careful, critical reading and reflection, rather than research.  Students will not be asked to read a lot, even for essays; but they will be expected:

                               (1) to read the assigned material carefully,

   (2) to do so before the class for which it is assigned, and

   (3) to come to class prepared to discuss it.

 

As the course schedule indicates, readings are assigned each week (and sometimes for specific classes). These readings are not heavy and an effort has been made to distribute them evenly throughout the year.  But students will be expected to read the assigned material carefully, before the class for which it is assigned, and to come to class prepared to discuss it.  Pop quizzes will be used to test and reward preparation. 

 

 

Texts         

NB: to save students the long line-ups in SUB bookstore, it will not be necessary purchase course materials for the first two weeks of the course. These materials will be available on the web page.

In an effort to reduce students' costs, most of the course readings have been edited into a coursepack, using copyright-free public domain sources. The coursepack for 2006-07 is the same as the one used last year. 

These texts are available in SUB Bookstore:

Readings in The History of Western Political Thought (Coursepack)

                   Plato, Republic (Penguin, Lee translation). (used last year).

 

 

Requirements and Grades

 

Grades will be based on essays and two exams: a mid‑term in December and a final.  The pop quizzes and class participation will be worth 10%.

 

However, students will have a choice of being evaluated primarily through essays or instead through exams.  Essay writing is an essential part of the learning in this course, but it is clear that some students prefer exams (or are more successful on them) while others prefer essays.  So students can decide for themselves whether to be graded primarily by essays or instead by exams.  There will be two grading formats.   In the exam-based format, students do four essays and these essays have the same weight (45%) as the exams.  In the essay-based format, students do one more essay and these five essays are worth twice as much as the exams.  

 

Essay format                                                                Exam-format

 

                                             quiz/oral       10%                                           quiz/oral                      10%

                                             mid term        10%                                           mid term                      15%

                                             final exam     20%                                           final exam                      30%

                                             essays (5)      60% (equally weighted)           essays (4)                     45%   (equally weighted)

 

You don=t have to do anything to indicate which format you want.  Your grade will be calculated in both formats, and you=ll get whichever grade is better.  If you=ve done four essays then this will obviously mean the exam format.  If you=ve done five essays, your grade will be calculated with the five essays in the essay format, and also with your four best essays in the exam format, and you=ll get whichever grade is better.

 

Can you do more than five essays?  Yes!  Many students improve their skills of analysis and essay-writing over the year, and in some cases the improvement is enormous.  It=s wonderful to see this happen.  So you are welcome (and urged) to do more than the required number of essays;  in which case, only your best essays will be used in determining the final grade. 

 

Texts:

 

In an effort to reduce students= costs, most of the course readings have been edited into a coursepack, using copyright-free public domain sources.  The coursepack for this year is the same as the one used last year (except, through a printing error, that there are no page numbers). 

 

There are two texts, both available in SUB Bookstore:

Readings in The History of Western Political Thought   (Coursepack)

Plato, Republic (Penguin, Lee translation). 

NB: to save students the long line-ups in SUB bookstore, it will not be necessary purchase course materials for the first two weeks of the course.  These materials will be available on the web page.

 

Essays

 

Essay-writing (like other forms of expression) is a skill which can be developed and improved.  Students will be encouraged to work at their essay writing skills and individual help will be available for students who want it. 

 

Essays in this course should be brief (1200-1500 words), positional, and critical, arguing a definite thesis in relation to some aspect of the readings.  These essays call for analysis and critical reflection.  They are not research papers.  They will not require any reading or research beyond the material assigned for the course. The best way to do well on such essays is by careful reading of the course material as indicated above.

 

At least four essays will be required, two in each term.  All students must do essays on (1) the introductory themes (due early October), (2) Plato (due late November), and (3) Hobbes (due late February). The fourth essay may be written on either Aristotle (early January), or Rousseau (mid-March).  Students who wish to write more than four essays may do so during the year (on any theorist on whom they haven=t already written) or on Marx (late March).  There will be choice on all topics.  Due dates and specific topics will be announced early in each term.

 

Late essay policy.  Essays will be due in class on the date stated and this deadline will be strict for the first essay.  For all other essays there will be a brief grace period for late papers.  Essays submitted on time will be marked and returned with comments as quickly as possible.  Essays submitted in the grace period will be returned later, with fewer comments.  Essays submitted after the grace period will be penalized.

 

 

 

Deferred Exam: the date of the deferred final will be listed as part of the schedule for the second term

 

Academic Integrity and Honesty

 

The Dean of Arts requests that course outlines remind students that academic dishonesty is a serious offence and can result in suspension or expulsion from the University.  Students are particularly urged to familiarize themselves with the Code of Student Behaviour (online at www.ualberta.ca/secretariat/appeals.htm)  and avoid any behaviour which could potentially result in suspicions of cheating, plagiarism, misrepresentation of facts and/or participation in an offence.

 

Student Distress Centre

 

I truly hope this won=t be necessary for any of you, but if you are having a hard time at any point -- on anything, whether emotional, financial or personal -- the Student Distress Centre is there to help.  You can reach them by Phone (492-HELP/ 492-4357) or Drop In (SUB  030-N) or Visit (www.su.ualberta.ca/sdc) or Chat ( www.campuscrisischat.com)

 

 

 

TOPICS & READINGS:  First Term

 

                                                                           

DEADLINES:         K essay  # 1: Wed, Oct 10th  (introduction) and Fri, Oct 12th  (essay) 

                                      K essay # 2:  Mon, Nov 20th 

                                      K mid term:  Mon,  Dec 17th

 

 

INTRODUCTION : J.S. MILL: On Liberty, Representative Government, and Utilitarianism

 

Sept. 5-7           Introduction

                        Wed:   introduction to the course

                               Fri:      J.S. Mill, Biographical Note + On Liberty, ch 1  (399-400,  412-16) (web page)

                                           + Johnston, “Reading beneath The Surface”  (web page)

 

Sept. 10‑14       Mill, On Liberty: freedom of thought and expression

Mon:  On Liberty, chs 2-3 (417-28)  (web page)   + Johnston (2.1)  

Wed:  On Liberty, chs 4-5 (428-39)   (web page)  + Johnston (2.2 & 2.3)

   Fri:  test case -- euthanasia: Rodriguez v BC (453-60)  (web page)  

 

 

THE PROBLEM OF POLITICAL AUTHORITY -- Sophocles= Antigone and Plato=s Socrates

 

Sept. 17‑21      Mill, Antigone

Mon:  Utilitarianism,  ch 2 (401-405)  + Representative Govt, ch 3 (441-46) + Johnston (2.4)

Wed:  Sophocles, Antigone (1-37):  is Antigone guilty?  + Johnston (3-4)

   Fri:  read Antigone again: should Creon punish Antigone?

 

Sept 24-28       Socrates

Mon:    Plato, Biographical Note + Apology + Crito (38-70) -- question: in the Crito, is Socrates obligated to stay?

Wed:  analysis of the Crito arguments. +  Essays (1 - 2.4)

  Fri:   review the Crito: do Socrates’ arguments apply to Antigone?

 

Oct. 1-5           Analysis

Throughout this week, the arguments of the Crito will be analyzed and criticized. 

Mon:  Essays (2.5 - 2.9)

Wed:  Essays (4.0)

 

 

 

PLATO: Republic (for those using different texts, the Stephanus pages are listed in italics)

 

Oct 8-12          Republic:  Introduction    K essay  # 1 due Wed (introduction) and Fri (essay) 

Mon:    Thanksgiving holiday:  no class

Wed:    Cephalus, Polemarchus (72-79) + Penguin text: ATranslator=s Introduction@  (xiii- lviii)

                                                Fri:      Thrasymachos  (79-85)

 

Oct. 15-19       Republic: Foundations of The State

                            Mon:    restatement by Glaucon & Adeimantus  (Penguin, pp 40 - 52) B  St 357a -367e.  +   Essays (3.1 - 3.4)

                     Wed:   social needs, education (Penguin, pp 53-76)      B   St 368a - 383b.  +  Essays (3.5 - 3.7)

                   Fri:      social classes (Penguin, pp. 96-100 + 112-29) B   St 400d - 403c + 412b -427c

 

Oct. 22-26       Republic, Justice

                        Mon:    the psyche (Penguin: pp.130-49)    B  St 427d - 441c

Wed: virtue in the individual (Penguin: pp. 149-56)  B   St 441c - 449a   

  Fri:     women as guardians, the family (Penguin: pp. 157 - 81)   B  St 449a - 466d         

 

Oct 29-Nov 2  Philosophy & Power

Mon:    philosophy: (Penguin: pp 189-92 + 208-19)   B  St 471c - 474b + 487b - 497a

Wed:   sun, line and cave analogies: (Penguin: pp. 226-48)   B  St 502d - 521b

                              Fri:    comparison: cave analogy (Penguin, 240-48) with Mill, Representative Government ch 3 (course pack, 441-46)

 

Nov. 5-9          Politics, Critical Issues

                     Mon:    democracy, tyranny (Penguin: 275-78, 290-314) B  St 543a- 545c, 553b - 576b

Wed:   justice benefits (Penguin: 314-19, 330-334)   B  St 576c - 580c, 588b - 592b

                              Fri:    is Plato mistaken?  If so -- where, and why?  ( no readings)

 

Nov 12-16       Fun week: Plato vs Mill

                     Mon:    no class: fall term break

                     Wed:   would Mill like Plato? review Representative Govt, ch 3

                                                   Fri:   topic tba

 

 

ARISTOTLE: Politics     

 

       Nov. 19-23      The "Nature" of Political Association      (K essay # 2 due Mon)

                   Mon:    Biographical Note (87-8) + Nicomachean Ethics - happiness (89-97)

         Wed:   Politics, Book 1 & 2 (100-12)   * difficulty alert

                                                   Fri:   the critique of Plato (property & families): review Book 2 - (105-12)

 

Nov. 26-30      Constitutions

         Mon:    Book 3  (112-20)  -  citizenship & constitutions

         Wed:   Book 4  (120-27)  -  types of constitution

                                                   Fri:   readings and topic tba

 

Dec. 3-5          Political Ideals and Problems

                                                Mon:    Bks 7-8 (127-35)   -  Aristotle's ideal

                                                Wed     Appendix: Aristotle on Slavery (136-39)

 

 

       Mid Term:      Monday,  December17th,  2 pm (classroom)

 

 

       Post-Holiday: Medieval Period

 

       Jan 7-11          Roman-Medieval Period                                

                                           Mon:    Alfarabi: Selections (146-53)

                                           Wed:   Cicero and Aquinas (141-44, 155-61) 

                                            Fri:     Machiavelli, The Prince  (164-75)

 

 

 

TOPICS & READINGS:  Winter (2nd)  Term

 

 

 

note: in the Friday seminars this term, each student will be asked to make a brief (4-5 min) oral presentation  -- either on the reading assigned for the day, or on the question assigned for discussion.  Students may, if they prefer, distribute written copies of their presentations instead of delivering them orally.

 

 

1000 Years in 5 Days:  The Roman – Arab - Western Medieval Period  (* Aristotle essays due Wed)

 

Jan 7-11      Al-farabi & the Arab-Muslim Tradiion, Cicero, Aquinas and Machiavelli       B  

                             Mon:     Alfarabi: Selections (“Political regimes” and “Philosophy, politics and religion”)

                             Wed:     Cicero and Aquinas (Cicero: On The Laws; and Aquinas, Summa Theologica

                               Fri:     Machiavelli, The Prince 

 

 

Rights & Authority: Hobbes and Locke 

 

Jan 14-18    Hobbes, Leviathan Part One 

                             Mon:     introduction:  Readings, (177- 89)- introduction +  Leviathan, ch 13, chs 1-5

                             Wed:     man & society:  Leviathan, chs 6-12  

                                Fri:    Leviathan, ch 13  --  question (1) is Hobbes right about the need for authority?

 

Jan 21-25    The Argument for Authority: Leviathan, Part Two

                             Mon:     natural right & morality: Leviathan, chs. 14‑16 

                             Wed:     authority: Leviathan, chs. 17-19   

                                Fri:    question (2): is Hobbes right about the nature and extent of the authority needed?

 

Jan 28-Feb 1   The Hidden (and Brighter) Side: Liberty & Law  

                             Mon:     liberty & law : Leviathan, chs 20-21 

                             Wed:     law & statecraft: Leviathan, chs 26-31+ Aquinas – review pp 158-61 (suicide, etc)

                                Fri:    question (3):  does the account of liberty and law improve Hobbes’ account? 

 

Feb 4-8       Locke, The Second Treatise B     (* Hobbes essays due Monday)

                             Mon:     human nature & rights: Second Treatise, chs 1-4 + “Rights” (Readings, 448-450)  

                             Wed:     rights & authority:  chs 7-9, 11, 19  (note that ch 5 on property is deferred to Friday)

                                Fri:    property:  Second Treatise,  ch 5  

 

Feb 11-15   Hobbes vs Locke: International Citizenship & Rights

Mon:   Hobbes v Lockean as models of international relations 

Wed: human rights:  Pocklington, “Against Inflating Human Rights”  (Windsor Yearbook of Access to Justice, 1982

   Fri:  question (4):  is Locke superior to Hobbes?

 

Feb 18-22   Reading Week

 

 

Rousseau

 

Feb 25- 29  Discourse on The Origin of Inequality B (* Hobbes vs Locke essays due Monday)

                             Mon:     Biographical Note,  Discourse, Part 1

                             Wed:     Discourse, Part 2 

                                Fri:    critical evaluation of Part 1.

 

Mar 3-7       The Social Contract: political issues

                             Mon:   Book 1  (Readings, 239-47)

                             Wed:     Book 2  (Readings, 247-56)

                                Fri:    can people be Aforced to be free@?

 

Mar 10-14   Rousseau: questions of interpretation.

                             Mon:     Books 3-4  (Readings, 257-67)

                             Wed:     conceptions of freedom and democracy

                                Fri:    critical evaluation  (Is Rousseau more like Mill or more like Plato?)

 

 

Marx

 

Mar 17-21   Hegel to Marx   --   (* Rousseau essays due Mon)

                             Mon:     Readings, 267-72:  Hegel, AThe Master-Servant Dialectic@  (NB- difficulty alert

Wed:   pp 326-29, 378-83: Marx - Biographical Note, Graveside Speech, , -- then ahead to “Preface to Critique of Political Economy” (378-9) and Capital,(380-3)

                                Fri:    no class - university closed

 

Mar 24-28   The “Young” Marx

                             Mon:     no class - university closed

Wed:     pp, 330-31, 340-47: Critique of Hegel, + Economic  & Philosophical Manuscripts (1): Alienated Labour (just up to p 294)

                                Fri:    pp 347-57: Economic & Philosophical Manuscripts, continued 

 

Mar 31-Apr4        Marx and PoliticsB   (* optional extra essays due Wednesday)

                             Mon:     pp 358-67:  materialism -- Theses on Feuerbach, German Ideology

                             Wed:     pp 384-97:  “The Civil War in France”  + “Critique of Gotha Programme”

 Fri:    pp 368-77:  Communist Manifesto    

 

 

Final Week: The Year in Review

 

Apr 7-11     Final week: Looking Back, Looking Ahead

                             Mon:     looking ahead – a brief introduction to some current political theory

W/F:     looking back: a review of the course with attention to the exam question announced on the first day of the course: “Write a critical assessment of  ??? (a particular theorist to be named).  Your answer

should assess this person’s claim to be considered a major political thinker by outlining the important parts of his theory and the strengths and weakness of his theory, explaining why they are strengths and weaknesses.”

 

  

Final Exam:   Friday, April 18th  (2008) -- at 2 pm in the classroom.         

 

 

 

ESSAY TOPICS

 

Essay # 1

 

1.         For purposes of this essay, I want you to imagine that you are a mmber of the Edmonton Public Library board of trustees.  As you know, individuals in our community sometimes hold beliefs that are widely dismissed by others as both hateful and stupid (too stupid to merit discussion).  Choose any specific example (it could be, say that members of a particular minority group are generally dishonest and unclean – but choose your own example, one that offends you personally,  and identify it specifically). 

 

Some fervent believers of this view want to hold a public information session in the public library, offering reasons and evidence for their position with an opportunity for opponents to debate it.  They cite Mill as the main reason why they should be allowed to do so: that our society cannot claim to be “free” unless it protects absolute freedom of opinion in this way.

 

As a trustee, you must vote – yes or no.  How would you vote, and why?

 

2.         Is it true that Socrates in the Crito proves that we must always obey the law?

 

3.         In the Apology, Socrates asserts that he would not obey a certain law if the Athenians were to pass it.  Is this consistenmt with his position in the Crito? 

 

Introduction due: Wed, Oct 10th in class

Paper due: Friday, Oct 12th, in class

 

 

Essay # 2: Plato

 

 

1.                           What’s Plato’s worst mistake?

 

2.                           Take any single alleged defect in Plato’s account, and defend him on it.

 

3.                           As between Mill and Plato, whose account provides a better understanding of a good society?

 

DUE: in class, Mon., Nov 20th   (grace period 5 days to Fri Nov. 24th ).*

 

* Agrace period@: essays submitted on time will be marked and returned with comments as quickly as possible.  Essays submitted in the grace period will be returned later, without comments.  Essays submitted after the grace period will be penalized.

 

 

ESSAY TOPICS:   Second Term             

 

In the second term, students must do two essays: one essay on either Aristotle (Jan 9) or Rousseau (Mar 17), and a second essay on Hobbes (Feb 4) or Hobbes vs Locke (Feb 25).  

 

Remember that you have the option of doing extra essays.  Extra essays may be written on any theorist on whom you haven=t already written or on the final topics.  The final topics are reserved for those doing extra essays.

 

Late Essays:  Essays are DUE on the dates indicated.  Papers submitted on time will be given very high priority: they will returned with comments as quickly as possible.  Papers submitted in the grace period will be given lower priority: they will be returned later and without comments.  Papers submitted after the grace period go to the bottom of the priority list.   

 

 

ARISTOTLE             [due Wed, Jan 9th ; grace period 5 days to Mon, Jan 14th ]

 

1.     Aristotle believes that Plato's political theory is mistaken in rejecting property and the family, and that this error reflects a deeper mistake on Plato's part: namely, that he does not appreciate the natural basis of political association.  Is Aristotle right? 

 

2.     Explain why Aristotle is wrong about slavery.

 

3.     Even though Aristotle was clearly wrong about the actual rational capacities of women (and slaves), wasn=t he right to insist on a fairly high degree of rational understanding as a condition for citizenship? 

 

 

ANTIGONE*     [due Wed, Jan 9th ; grace period 5 days to Mon, Jan 14th ]

 

* only for students doing extra essays (note, you may do this one and also one on Aristotle). 

 

1.       Write a critical assessment of the way the political problem of the play is presented in this year’s Studio Theatre production of Antigone.  Feel free to use Mill, Plato or Aristotle in supporting your position.  Attach your ticket stub to your essay. 

 

 

HOBBES                    [due Mon, Feb 4th ; grace period 5 days to Fri, Feb 8th]

 

1.   Select part of Hobbes’ argument. By a very close inspection of the argument in this passage, evaluate Hobbes’s argumentative position and method.  (You may choose any passage you want, but one or two pages at most.  Do not wander outside of the very special point you have chosen to examine). 

 

2.   What do you consider the single most important objection to Hobbes’ political theory? How would Hobbes respond to this objection? Consider carefully the adequacy of his response.

 

3.   Hobbes suggests (in his typically modest way) that his understanding of politics is superior to Aristotle’s.  Do you agree?

 

 

HOBBES VS LOCKE [due Mon, Feb 25th ; grace period 5 days to Fri, Feb 29th]

 

1.          Does Locke refute Hobbes?

 

2.   If it is true that international relations today is a state of nature, is this condition better understood in Lockean terms or in Hobbesian terms?  (That is, can you use the evidence of international relations to support either Hobbes or Locke against the other?)

 

3.  Does Klutz have human rights?  Compare Hobbes and Locke with reference to their conceptions of natural rights (the nature of the rights and their justification) specifically with reference to their adequacy in dealing with “the problem of Klutz”.

 

 

ROUSSEAU [due Mon, March 17th ; grace period 5 days to Fri, March 21st]

 

1.          Does the Social Contract respond adequately to the problem(s) outlined in the Second Discourse? 

 

2.          It has been said that A...in the political theories of Hobbes and Locke, individuals confront one another and the state just as separate individuals, with no sense of community. Thus Hobbes and Locke both understand freedom as the freedom of separate individuals against one another and against the community.  By contrast, Rousseau shows that we can be truly free only by acting with others as members of a community.@  Do you agree?

 

3.          Rousseau believes that the citizens of his republic can be “free” in obeying the law in a way that the citizens of Hobbes’ state are not.  Is this correct?  Does his distinction between the general will and the will of all explain this?

 

 

FINAL TOPICS*  [due Wed, Apr 9th ; grace period 5 days to Mon, Apr 14th  in the general office by 4 pm]

 

* only for students doing extra essays (five or more)

 

1.  Given a choice between reducing alienation and protecting individual liberty – which is the better choice and how should we understand it? 

 

2.     Comparing Marx with either Aristotle or Locke, who has the better account of  private property? 

 

3.     Can a genuinely free person obey the state?. 

 

4.     Political theorists today (and polite company) generally do not discuss religion.  By contrast, all of the theorists considered this term do so – some of them quite extensively.  Who does it best?

 

5.   "[Hobbes] shared with Plato a general distrust of his fellow man; but he thought that institutional control rather than the breeding and training of a specialized ruling class was the only effective safeguard against the depravity of man." Discuss this by a detailed comparative analysis of one or two points of Hobbes's and Plato's views on government.