Skip to main content
Log in

Political action and the philosophy of mind

  • Article
  • Published:
Contemporary Political Theory Aims and scope

Abstract

The problem of political action has its roots, arguably, in the sixth book of the Nicomachean Ethics, where Aristotle seeks to describe an intellectual virtue – phronêsis – that is different from the faculty of theoretical reason but that is nonetheless capable of producing genuinely objective, rational knowledge, i.e., knowledge of what is true. The problem, specifically, is to understand how such a thing is possible, and much of the recent literature appears to suggest that perhaps it’s not. Since rhetoric, persuasion, interest and emotion are obviously central features of political life, it may seem that some kind of non-intellectualist and non-rationalist perspective must be the way to go. I argue, nonetheless, that any such account is, and cannot but be, deeply problematic; and I defend, by way of contrast, a decidedly intellectualistic understanding of political enterprise.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adorno, T. (1974) Minima Moralia: Reflections From Damaged Life. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arendt, H. (1968) Truth in Politics. In Between Past and Future. New York: Viking.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beiner, R. (1983) Political Judgment. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bengson, J., and Moffett, M. (2011) Knowing How: Essays on Knowledge, Mind, and Action. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1986) An epistemic conception of democracy. Ethics 97: 26–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Connolly, W. (2002) Neuropolitics: Thinking, culture, speed. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dennett, D. C. (1981) Brainstorms: Philosopohical essays on mind and psychology. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dreyfus, H. (1991) Being-in-the-World: A Commentary on Heidegger’s Being and Time. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dreyfus, H. (2002) Intelligence without representation: Merleau-Ponty’s critique of mental representation. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 1: 367–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dreyfus, H. (2005) The myth of the mental: How philosophers can profit from the phenomenology of everyday experience. Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association 79: 47–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson, K. (1999) The Politics of Judgment: Aesthetics, Identity and Political Theory. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson, K. (2014) The deep biology of politics: A reminder. Political Research Quarterly 67: 457–461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferrara, A. (1999) Justice and Judgment: The Rise and Prospect of the Judgment Model in Contemporary Political Philosophy. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fodor, J. (1968) The appeal of tacit knowledge in psychological explanation. Journal of Philosophy 65: 627–640.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fridland, E. (2012) Knowing-how: Problems and Considerations. European Journal of Philosophy 23: 703–727.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garsten, B. (2006) Saving Persuasion: A Defense of Rhetoric and Judgment. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ginet, C. (1975) Knowledge, Perception, and Memory. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Reidel.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Heidegger, M. (2006 [1927]) Sein und Zeit. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.

  • Krause, S. (2008) Civil Passions: Moral Sentiment and Democratic Deliberation. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Krause, S. (2011) Bodies in action: Corporeal agency and democratic politics. Political Theory 39: 299–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lycan, W. (1986) Tacit belief. In: R. Bogdan (ed.) Belief: Form, Content and Function. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDowell, J. (2007). Response to Dreyfus. Ethics 50: 4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Panagia, D. (2009) The Political Life of Sensation. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Railton, P. (2009) Practical competence and fluent agency. In: D. Sobel and S. Walls (eds.) Reasons for Actions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryle, G. (1949) The Concept of Mind. London: Hutchinson’s University Library.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W. (1995) Institutions and Organizations. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Searle, J. (1983) Intentionality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Searle, J. (2000) The limits of phenomenology. In: M. Wrathall and J. Malpas (eds.) Heidegger, Coping and Cognitive Science. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanley, J. (2011) Know How. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Steinberger, P. (2009) The Idea of the State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinberger, P. (2015a) The Politics of Objectivity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Steinberger, P. (2015b) Rationalism in politics. American Political Science Review 109: 750–763.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, C. (2005) Merleau-ponty and the epistemological picture. In: T. Carman (ed.) Cambridge Companion to Merleau-Ponty. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thiele, L. (2006) The Heart of Judgment: Practical Wisdom. Neuroscience and Narrative Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Weidenfeld, M. (2011) Comportment, not cognition: Contributions to a phenomenology of judgment. Contemporary Political Theory 2: 232–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zerilli, L. (2012) Value pluralism and the problem of judgment: Farewell to public reason. Political Theory 40: 6–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zerilli, L. (2016) A Democratic Theory of Judgment. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter J. Steinberger.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Steinberger, P.J. Political action and the philosophy of mind. Contemp Polit Theory 20, 364–384 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41296-020-00416-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41296-020-00416-2

Keywords

Navigation