Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T21:24:03.442Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Possibilities and Madness: A Note on the Scope of Political Theory

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2009

James V. Schall
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In classical political thought, politics and art were alike since both were works of the practical, not the speculative, reason, within whose ample scope there was great room for things to be otherwise. Art and politics differed because politics was limited by its end, and therefore freed from the absolute indifference of pure possibility which looked to existence only as an alternative, as something which had no need of existence whatsoever, even though it was the ultimate origin of change. Art, on the other hand, was limited by the esthetic perhaps, but was not restricted by the requirement of definite being —a two-headed man, a green nose, a flying cow, any conceivable combination of sounds, shapes, or colors were thus quite possible artistically. Their reality depended on the creativity of the artist and his will to make.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Review of Politics , Volume 37 , Issue 2 , April 1975 , pp. 161 - 174
Copyright
Copyright © University of Notre Dame 1975

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See Winiarski, Warren, “Niccolo Machiavelli,” in History of Political Philosophy, ed.Strauss, Leo (Chicago, 1963), pp.247–76Google Scholar; Sabine, George, A History of Political Theory (New York, 1965), pp.211–53:Google Scholar;McCoy, C. N. R., The Structure of Political Thought (New York, 1963), pp.157–79Google Scholar.

2 Aristotle, , Politics 1. 2. 1253a9–17; 25–30Google Scholar.

3 Aristotle, , Politics 1. 2. 1253b29; Metaphysics 12. 2. 1070a 5–9Google Scholar.

4 Ellul, Jacques, The Political Illusion (New York, 1967), pp. 192–93Google Scholar.

5 Ellul, , Political Illusion, p. 190Google Scholar. Compare the following from Plato:

“By the dog of Egypt, he will! in the city which is his own he certainly will, though in the land of his birth perhaps not, unless he have a divine call.

“I understand; you mean that he will be a ruler in the city of which we are the founders, and which exists in idea only; for I do not believe that there is such a one anywhere on earth?”

“In heaven, I replied, there is laid up a pattern of it, methinks, which he who desires may behold, and whether such a one exists, or ever will exist in fact, is no matter; for he will live after the manner of that city, having nothing to do with any other.

“I think so, he said” (Republic, Modern Library [1941], p.360)Google Scholar.

6 This is the classical problem of the relation of the contemplative and political common good. The existence of a genuine human good which is not exclusively political serves both to keep politics to be politics and not metaphysics and to locate the validity of politics as a legitimate human enterprise. This is why the following passages from Aristotle's Metaphysics have political importance because they prevent politics from endeavoring to attain goals beyond its own sphere of autonomy: “On such a principle, then, depend the heavens and the world of nature. And it is a life such as the best which we enjoy, and enjoy for but a short time (for it is ever in this state, which we cannot be), since its actuality is also pleasure” (Metaphysics 12. 6. 1072bl4–16); “We answer that everything which has not matter is indivisible—as human thought, or rather the thought of composite beings, is in a certain period of time (for it does not possess the good at this moment or at that, but its best, being something different from it, is attained only in a whole period of time)” (ibid. 12. 9. 1075a6–10). See also McCoy, , Structure of Political Thought, p. 5Google Scholar.

7 Christian theory as such on this point is based on Aquinas' famous question in the Treatise on Law which asks about the necessity of precisely divine law over and above human law. It is precisely because human law cannot be expected to achieve full justice that the question aríses and which makes Aquinas' treatment near to the Tenth Book of Plato's Republic.

8 Arendt, Hannah, Beyond Past and Future (New York, 1968), p. 258Google Scholar.

9 Perhaps another form of this effect is the statement of a Palestinian skyjacker who was involved in the killing of thirty-two random passengers at the Rome airport: “We are Palestinian Arabs, proud of what we did” (National Observer, 29 December 1973). Terror becomes justified in itself because everyone is considered somehow guilty. Therefore, killing just anyone can be seen as a source of pride. The most fundamental principle of political order, the right to life, becomes secondary.

10 “Political Prisoners in Psychiatric Hospitals,” A Chronicle of Current Events. October 1972, p. 235. Cf. Broun, J., “The Abuse of Psychiatry in the USSR.” Month (London), 09 1974, pp.704–707Google Scholar.

11 It is worthwhile to point out too that the most effective elements in the Waterpate proceedings have been the mere narration of who did what, not theory but dated, particular facts.

12 Zhores, and Medvedev, Roy, A Question of Madness, tr. de Kadt, E. (New York, 1971)Google Scholar.

13 Laing, R. D., The Politics of Experience (New York, 1967)Google Scholar: Cleaver, Eldridge, Soul on Ice (New York, 1968)Google Scholar; Brown, Norman O., Loire's Body (New York, 1966)Google ScholarPubMed

14 There is a good deal of this kind of approach also in contemporary liberation theology: Miranda, J.. Marx and the Bible (Maryknoll, New York, 1974), chap. 4Google Scholar; Gutierrez, G., A Theology of Liberation (Maryknoll, New York, 1973)Google Scholar.

15 Marcuse, Herbert, One-Dimensional Man (Boston, 1967), pp.256–57Google Scholar.

16 Sontag, Susan, “Sartre's Saint Genet,” Against Interpretation (New York, 1966), pp. 95–96Google Scholar.

17 Tacitus, , Annals 3. 65 (Modern Library /1942/, p. 137)Google Scholar.

18 True, Michael, “Poetry and Survival,” Commonweal, 21 12 1973, p. 315Google Scholar.

19 Ibid., p. 312.

20 Voegelin, Eric, The New Science of Politics (Chicago, 1952), p. 169Google Scholar.

21 Kariel, Henry, “Possibilities,” in The Post-Behavioral Era, ed. Graham, G. (New York, 1972), p. 136Google Scholar.

22 Ibid., p. 136. The language used here is noteworthy in itssimilarity to the end of Isaiah and the Book of Revelation, another example of the ease with which contemporary theory shifts to religion in its theoretical structure without fully being aware of it. Cf. Voegelin, New Science, chap. 4.

23 Kariel, , “Possibilities,” p. 140Google Scholar.

24 Voegelin, , New Science, p. 178Google Scholar.

25 Strauss, Leo, “What Is Political Philosophy?” in Contemporary Political Thought, ed. Gould, J. (New York, 1969), pp. 69 and 62Google Scholar.

26 Gray, Alexander, The Socialist Tradition, Moses to Lenin (New York, 1968), p. 328Google Scholar.

27 Aristotle, Politics 5. 11. 1314al4–30

28 Ibid. 7. 1. 1323b29.