Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vvkck Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T13:02:17.574Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Agendas, Arguments, and Political Theory

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 September 2006

John Harman
Affiliation:
St. John Fisher College
Deborah Vanderbilt
Affiliation:
St. John Fisher College

Extract

If teaching is not the oldest profession, it certainly has a long historical pedigree. The frustrations teaching evokes likely have an equally long pedigree. One sees in Plato's Republic, for example, Socrates' frustration in trying to convey to Glaukon the aims of the educational scheme he is presenting to his interlocutors in Book 8. His evident difficulties relaying this information have doubtless struck sympathetic chords in the breasts of countless generations of teachers. Frustration has certainly been the case for the present authors, particularly in teaching the analysis and understanding of secondary commentary on classic texts; when reading such articles, students express puzzlement about the long debate over seemingly trivial points. Many come away from such classes convinced it is not worth investing time in understanding classic texts because the discussion of them centers on apparently arcane and obscure grammatical, historical, or technical questions. This essay presents an approach with which the authors have had some measure of success in helping students “see the point” of this especially difficult dimension of analyzing and understanding texts and authors. Our approach teaches students to identify and appreciate the “agenda argument” often put forward by such commentators. An “agenda argument” is a contemporary scholar's effort to address a current problem or issue through critical reflection on an iconic text or author in the field. The term “agenda” is appropriate because it clarifies that the scholar has an interest in an underlying general claim through discussion of the technical points being debated. In other words, the scholar has a larger agenda in mind that guides the selection of issues and determines the use of points in the text.

Type
THE TEACHER
Copyright
© 2006 The American Political Science Association

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

Eckstein, Harry. 1956. “Political Theory and the Study of Politics: A Report of a Conference.” American Political Science Review 50 (June): 47587.Google Scholar
Gunnell, John. 1988. “American Political Science, Liberalism and the Invention of Political Theory.” American Political Science Review 82 (March): 7187.Google Scholar
Jackson, M. W. 1995. “Skimming the Surface or Going Deep.” PS: Political Science and Politics 28 (September): 5124.Google Scholar
Klosko, George. 1981. “Implementing the Ideal State.” Journal of Politics 43 (May): 36589.Google Scholar
Mackey, Jill A. 2001. “Subtext and Countertext in Muriel's Wedding.” NWSA Journal 13: 86104.Google Scholar
Macpherson, C. B. 1973. “Hobbes's Bourgeois Man.” In Democratic Theory: Essays in Retrieval. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 23850.
Popper, Karl. 1971. The Open Society and Its Enemies, Vols. 1 & 2. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Saxonhouse, Arlene. 1978. “Comedy in Callipolis: Animal Imagery in the Republic.” American Political Science Review 72 (September): 888901.Google Scholar
Strauss, Leo. 1985. Natural Right and History. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Seaman, John W. 1990. “Hobbes on Public Charity & the Prevention of Idleness: A Liberal Case for Welfare.” Polity 23 (fall): 10526.Google Scholar
Whatling, Clare. 1994. “ Fostering the Illusion: Stepping Out with Jodie.” In The Good, the Bad, and the Gorgeous: Popular Culture's Romance with Lesbianism, eds. Diane Hamer and Belinda Budge. London: Pandora, 18495.