course outline

texts

Grades

Topics & Readings    (1st term)

Topics (2nd Term)

On-Line Readings

essays

essay topics

final exam

 

science 210 (section C1)

 

2008-09:   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.


 

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 this year is different from 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).

 

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.

 


 


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. 


 


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 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: Mon, Oct 6th  (introduction) and Wed, Oct 8th  (essay) 

                                      K essay # 2:  Mon, Nov 12h 

                                      K mid term:  Mon,  Dec 16th

 

 

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

 

Sept. 3-5           Introduction

                        Wed:   introduction to the course

                               Fri:      J.S. Mill, Biographical Note + On Liberty, ch 1  (401-407)  (web page)

                                           + Johnston, “Essays: 1. "Reading beneath The Surface"  (web page)

 

Sept. 8‑12         Mill, On Liberty: freedom of thought and expression

Mon:  On Liberty, chs 2-3 (408-19)  (web page)   + Johnston, Essays (5.1 – 5.3)  

Wed:  On Liberty, chs 4-5 (419-24)   (web page)  + + Johnston, Essays (5.4 – 5.5)

   Fri:  On Liberty, chs 4-5 (425-30)   (web page) + test case (TBA)  

 

 

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

 

Sept. 15‑19      Mill, Antigone

Mon:  Utilitarianism,  chs 2 & 5 (433-42)  + Representative Govt, ch 3 (445-50) + + Johnston, Essays (2.1 – 2.2)

Wed:  Sophocles, Antigone (1-37):  is Antigone guilty?  + + Johnston,  Essays (2.3 – 2.4)

   Fri:  read Antigone again: should Creon punish Antigone?

 

Sept 22-26       Socrates

Mon:    Plato, Biographical Note + Crito (61-72) -- question: in the Crito, is Socrates obligated to stay? + Johnston, Essays (3.1 – 3.2)

Wed:  analysis of the Crito arguments. +  Johnston, Essays (3.3 – 3.6),    do the exercise in 3.5 before class

  Fri:   Plato, Apology (41-58)

 

Sept 29- Oct 3 Analysis

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

Mon:  Johnston, Essays (3.7 – 3.9)  do the exercise in 3.7 before class

Wed:  Johnston, Essays (4.1 – 4.2)

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

 

 

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

 

Oct 6-10         Republic:  Introduction    K essay  # 1 due Mon (introduction) and Wed (essay) 

Mon: Cephalus, Polemarchus (75-82) + Penguin ATranslator=s Introduction@ (xiii- lviii)

Wed: Thrasymachos  (83-88)

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

 

Oct. 13-17      Republic: Foundations of The State

Mon:  Thanksgiving holiday

Wed: social needs, education (Penguin, 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. 20-24      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 27-31       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. 3-7      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:          No Seminars – lecture in the classroom

 

 

ARISTOTLE: Ethics and Politics 

 

Nov 10-14   The Fulfilled Life     (K essay # 2 due Wed)

Mon:  no class: fall term break

Wed:   Aristotle’s Ethics: a brief overview:  Biographical Note + Ethics, Books 1-2, 10 (91-99, 106-109)

                                     Fri:  friendship: Ethics, Books 8-9  (102-106)

 

Nov. 17-21 The "Nature" of Political Association

Mon:  the nature of political association: Politics, Book 1 (113-17)

Wed:  justice (Ethics Bk 5, pp 99-100) + critique of Plato (Politics Bk 2, pp 117-21)

                                     Fri:  seminar on the critique of Plato (property & families): Book 2 (117-21)

 

Nov. 24-28   Constitutions

Mon: citizens, constitutions and the best constitution under normal conditions  - Books 3-4  (121-32)

Wed: the “best” constitution under ideal conditions - Books 7 - 8  (132-38)

   Fri: the best of Plato vs the best of Aristotle

 

Dec. 1-3        In Review:

Mon: Alfarabi: Selections (147-54)

Wed: Aristotle’s elitism:  slavery, etc

 

 

Mid Term:   scheduled for Tuesday, December 16th,  2 pm (classroom)

 

 

 

TOPICS & READINGS:  Second Term

 

 

Post-Holiday: Medieval Period

 

Jan 5-9     Roman-Medieval Period -- Cicero, Aquinas and Machiavelli                                

                     Mon:  Natural Law (1) Cicero  (141-44)

                                Wed:  Natural Law (2) Aquinas (157-63)

                                  Fri:   Machiavelli, The Prince  (167-78)

 

The Roman  Western Medieval Period 

 

Jan 5-9        Cicero, Aquinas and Machiavelli   

                             Mon:           Natural Law (1) Cicero  (141-44)

                             Wed:           Natural Law (2) Aquinas (157-63)

                               Fri:           Machiavelli, The Prince  (167-78)

 

 

Rights & Authority: Hobbes and Locke 

 

Jan 12-16    Hobbes, Leviathan Part One  (* Aristotle essays due Monday)

                             Mon:           introduction + Leviathan, chs 13, 1-5 (195-98, 181-85)

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

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

 

Jan 19-23    The Argument for Authority: Leviathan, Part Two

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

                             Wed:           authority: Leviathan, chs. 17-20

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

 

Jan 26-30    The Hidden (and Brighter?) Side: Liberty & Law  

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

                             Wed:           law & statecraft: Leviathan, chs 26-31 + Aquinas – review pp 159-63 (suicide, etc)

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

 

Feb 2-6       Locke, The Second Treatise B     (* Hobbes essays due Monday)

                             Mon:           human nature & rights: Second Treatise, chs 1-4 + “Rights” (Readings, 453-55) 

                             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 9-13     Hobbes vs Locke: International Citizenship & Rights

Mon:         Hobbes v Locke as models of international relations

  Wed:         human rights:  Pocklington, “Against Inflating Human Rights   

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

 

 

Feb 16-20   Reading Week


 

 

Rousseau

 

Feb 23- 27  Discourse on The Origin of Inequality B (* Hobbes vs Locke essays due Monday)

                             Mon:           Biographical Note,  Discourse, Part 1 (257-72)

                             Wed:           Discourse, Part 2  (272-86)

                                Fri:          critical evaluation of Part 1.

 

Mar 2-6      The Social Contract: political issues

                             Mon:   Book 1  (289-97)

                             Wed:           Book 2  (297-306)

                                Fri:          can people be Aforced to be free@?

 

Mar 9-13    Rousseau: questions of interpretation.

                             Mon:           Books 3-4  (307-16)

                             Wed:           conceptions of freedom and democracy

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

 

Marx

 

Mar 16-20  The “Young” Marx --   (* Rousseau essays due Monday)

Mon:   pp 327-30, 379-84: Marx - Biographical Note, Graveside Speech, , -- then ahead to “Preface to Critique of Political Economy” (379-80) and Capital,(381-4)

Wed:      pp, 331-32, 341-48: Critique of Hegel, + Economic  & Philosophical Manuscripts (1): Alienated Labour

                                Fri:          pp 348-58: Economic & Philosophical Manuscripts, continued 

 

Mar 23-27   Marx and PoliticsB  

                             Mon:           pp 359-68:  materialism -- Theses on Feuerbach, German Ideology

Wed:           pp 385-98:  “The Civil War in France  + “Critique of Gotha Programme”

                                Fri:          pp 369-78:  Communist Manifesto    

 

 

Looking Ahead, Looking Back

 

Mar 30-Apr3    a brief introduction to more recent political theory (* optional extra essays due Wednesday)

                             Mon:           Rawls (481-88) + review Mill

                             Wed:           Nussbaum  (489-96) and Charles Taylor

   Fri:          final seminars – topic tba

 

Apr 6-8                 Final week: The Year in Review

Mon and Wed (the last class): 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:      scheduled for Monday, April 20th  (2009) -- at 2 pm in the classroom.

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

ESSAYS

 

 

General Requirements

 

Essays should be double‑spaced with wide (1.5") margins on all four sides to allow for comments.  They must footnote sources and they must contain a bibliography (even if just one work).

 

Essays in this course are expected to be brief (1200-1500 words), critical, and positional.  That is, the essay must adopt a specific position on the topic and then argue in support of this position using the course material.  The position must be stated in the first paragraph as:  AIn this essay I will argue that ...@ 

 

 

The Nature of The Essay

 

Essays should be "position papers".  The main concern is argument, rather than interpretation or research: you are expected to take a definite position on the topic, and to argue this position effectively.  It is essential to show a good understanding of the theorist and text in question; but this understanding should be developed through a critical argument.  Papers will be assessed mainly by the quality of their arguments: especially, by whether the argument is effective/persuasive, well‑organized, and clearly presented, with some appreciation for what might be said against it.

 

The fact that these are not "research papers" does not mean that you should not read widely (eg, commentaries and current philosophical discussions of the issues, as listed in the bibliography).  On the contrary, you can sharpen your thinking and develop clearer critical perspectives by reading widely.  In particular, whenever your essay deals with an important concept (eg, justice, or democracy, or freedom) it is a good idea to read more about this concept.  But remember that your essay will be judged by the quality of your arguments, not by your sources.  Thus your main priority should be to read (and re‑read) critically the text, to think carefully about the issues it raises, and to identify your own views on these issues as clearly as possible.

 

The topics listed below are suggestive and others may be added later to reflect particular issues that arise in the course. Students are also encouraged to propose their own topics on issues of special interest.  These should be discussed with the instructor well before the essay deadline.

 

 

Some Tips

 


The key to your paper is your "thesis" (the position you argue).  Your main concern should be to work out exactly ‑‑ and clearly ‑‑ what this is.  The best way to do this is by thinking critically and carefully about the text.  It also helps to read commentaries and to discuss the issues with friends ‑‑ this may clarify what you want to argue, and what may be said on the other side.

 

Your first paragraph should state your thesis clearly ("In this essay I will argue that ...") and indicate how you will argue it (eg: "I will argue this in three steps").  The rest of the paper should be organized around arguing this thesis as effectively as possible.

 

Obviously, you can't say much in a brief essay so you must choose the most important arguments.  It may be necessary to define the topic more narrowly, ie, focussing your paper on just one of the issues raised by the topic.

 

You should also consider possible objections to your argument, and how you might rebut them (eg, if you are criticizing Plato, how might he respond : and what would you say in rebuttal?).  Here again, you should be brief and selective.

 

Remember that you are trying to persuade: the aim of the paper is not to show off what you know (to a teacher) but rather to make a persuasive case (eg to a judge and jury).

 

Finally, this kind of essay will be new for most of you, and it will take some time to learn how to do it well.  So be prepared to learn, and give yourself time over the year to do so. And remember the basic AThree Times Rule@: you will need to write your essay at least Three Times:

 

 (1)  After you choose the topic, DON=T write the essay: instead do some free writing around it -- perhaps more than once -- to let your real ideas emerge.

 

(2)  After a few days, identify your position and write a draft of the paper.  Leave it for a few days.

 

(3)  Then read the draft critically.  Examine your thesis B has it changed?  Have you stated it adequately and clearly in the introduction?  Examine your arguments B are there some points you need to develop further?  Are there some  important objections you need to consider?  Then revise the paper.

 

 

Checklist

 

Before signing off on your essay, check these points:

 

  have you narrowed the topic into a specific thesis? (one reason that Mill’s account is mistaken is ...)

 

  have you asserted this thesis (position) clearly in paragraph 1? (In this essay I will argue that that Mill’s account is mistaken because ...)

 

  does each paragraph advance this position?

 

  have you thought about the question from both sides of the issue?  Do your reasons take some account of what might be said on the other side?

 

  have you engaged with the text – presenting the theorist’s position fairly and considering how s/he might respond to any criticisms you’ve made?

 

  have you cited the text for any claims made about the theorist?  Have you included a bibliography?

 

 

 

 

ESSAY TOPICS

 

Essay #1:  Mill, Socrates

 

1.     Socrates suggests in the Apology (p 12), that he would not obey a certain law if the Athenians were to pass it.  Is this consistent with his position in the Crito? 

 

2.     Mill declares in On Liberty that an individual’s liberty can be limited only “to prevent harm to others. His own good ... is not a sufficient warrant” (403) but he seems to contradict this in his claim (ch 5) that individuals cannot sell themselves into slavery.  Using Mill’s text, assess whether his position is truly contradictory on this point.  Your assessment should be based on the best case you can make that there is no contradiction.

 

3.     Mill seems to hold that liberty can only be limited to prevent harm to others and that no one can be harmed by anyone else’s belief.  Does this mean that he would oppose any restrictions on the expression of racial/ethnic stereotypes?

 

Introduction due: Mon, Oct 6th in class

Paper due: Wed, Oct 8th, in class

 

nb: this deadline is strict. For other papers in the course there will be a grace period (as below).  But this paper must be submitted on or before the due date

 

 

 

Essay # 2: Plato

 

1.     The class structure in Plato’s ideal republic is an affront to human happiness and dignity.

 

2.     Mill and Plato diagree about how much liberty there should be in the ideal society.  Whose view is right, and why?

 

3.     Would the Socrates of the Apology and the Crito endorse Plato’s Republic? 

 

DUE: in class, Wed., Nov 12th   (grace period 5 days to Mon Nov. 17th ).*

 

·       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

 

 

 

ESSAY TOPICS:   Second Term

 

 

In the second term, students must do two essays: one essay on either Aristotle (Jan 19) or Rousseau (Mar 16), and a second essay on Hobbes (Feb 2) or Hobbes vs Locke (Feb 23).  

 

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.

 

Academic Form:  Essays must be submitted in correct academic form with adequate textual citation and a bibliography (even if it is just one work); inadequate form and insufficient citation will be penalized. 

 

Citation for Works in the Coursepack:  The first reference/footnote should cite the work fully (as below) and include the note “future references to this work will be cited by page/line number in the text”.  Subsequent references should then indicatethe page and line in parentheses in the text (213/35). For example,

 

The essay text reads:

 

In Leviathan, Hobbes argues that the state of men1 without government would be “a time of war, where every man is enemy to every man”2.  He makes it plain, however, that this “war” might not consist in actual fighting; it is simply a time in which men are willing to fight (201/11-18).

 

The footnotes read:

 

1.       by “men” I believe Hobbes means “people”

 

2.         Hobbes, Leviathan, in Readings in The History of Western Political Thought  (Course pack) edited by Don Carmichael from the Public Domain University of Adelaide electronic texts collection, rendered into HTML by Steve Thomas.

 

 

 

Extra First Term Topic : due Mon, Jan 12th ; grace period 5 days to Fri, Jan 16th

 

This topic is only for students doing extra essays (note, you may do this one and also one on Aristotle)

 

1.     Would the Socrates of the Apology and the Crito endorse Plato’s Republic? 

 

 

Aristotle:  due Mon, Jan 12th ; grace period 5 days to Fri, Jan 16th

 

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

 

2.     Aristotle argues that the life of contemplation is superior to the life of practical citizenship activity in the community (NE 10:7-8).  Is his argument convincing?   [your account should consider both the Ethics and the Politics],

 

3.    “the best life is only possible where men are free from need and free especially  from the need to earn a living; only then can they engage in what is worthy for its own sake alone.”  p137, lines 20 f).  Is Aristotle right that the ideally best life consists of worthy activities that are done just because of their worthiness, and that they cannot be done for payment?

 

 

Hobbes:  due Mon, Feb 2nd ; grace period 5 days to Fri, Feb 6th]

 

1.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.

 

2.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). 

 

Hobbes vs Locke:  due Mon, Feb 23rd;  grace period 5 days to Fri, Feb 27th

 

1.   Hobbes and Locke disagree about the proper extent of political authority.  Setting aside your preference for one conclusion or the other, assess whose argument is superior

 

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? 

 

3.   Are there any human rights?  Is Locke=s account better than Hobbes=?

 

 

Rousseau:  due Mon, March 16th ; grace period 5 days to Fri, March 20th

 

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*

 

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

 

topics 4 & 5 on Marx added (Feb 25); topic 1 is partly on Marx.

 

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

 

2.               The Supreme Court rulings on the possession of child pornography (coursepack: R. v. Sharpe) were complicated by a lower court finding that the simple possession (as opposed to production) of child pornography has not been shown to cause direct harm.  In their rulings, the majority rejected this finding whereas the minority declared that it didn’t matter.  Drawing on theorists in the course, assess the minority decision.

 

3.               Can a genuinely free person obey the state (and remain free in doing so)? 

 

4.               In Marx’s view, what is the main cause of human alienation: (1) private property, (2) capitalist relations of production, (3) the division of labour?

 

5.               Is Marx right about the conditions that must obtain before society can inscribe on its banners: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”?

 

DUE:     in class, Fri, Apr 3rd ; grace period 5 days to Wed, Apr 8th.  This is the absolute final date for submitting essays.  Please note that essays submitted in the grace period will not be marked or returned until after the exam.

 

 

 

 

 

The Final Exam:  will be outlined in the last class, and TA office hours for the week before the exam will be posted on my office door. You will be asked to answer three questions.

 

One question (worth 50%) will ask you to write a critical assessment of one of the theorists on the course (you’ll be given two alternatives).   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

 

The other two questions (each worth 25%) will ask for an interpretation (as on the December test) according to these instructions:

 

 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