8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)

1/21

STATE OF NATURE

State of nature is a term in political philosophy used in social contract theories to

describe the hypothetical condition of humanity before the state's foundation. In a

broader sense, the state of nature is the condition before the rule of positive

law comes into being, thus being a synonym of anarchy. The idea of the state

of nature was a part of a classical republicanism theory as a hypothetical reason of

entering a state of society by establishing a government.

Hobbes's philosophy

The concept of state of nature was posited by the 17th century English

philosopher Thomas Hobbes inLeviathan.[1]Hobbes wrote that "during the time men

live without a common power to keep them all in awe, they are in that condition

which is called war; and such a war as is of every man against every man"(Leviathan, ch. XIII). In this state any person has a natural right to do anything to

preserve his own liberty or safety, and life is "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short"

(loc. cit.). He believed that in the international arena, states behave as individuals do

in a state of nature.

Within the state of nature there is no injustice, since there is no law, excepting

certain natural precepts, the first of which is "that every man ought to endeavour

peace, as far as he has hope of obtaining it" (Leviathan, ch. XIV); and the second is

"that a man be willing, when others are so too, as far forth as for peace and defenceof himself he shall think it necessary, to lay down this right to all things; and be

contented with so much liberty against other men as he would allow other men

against himself" (loc. cit.). From this, Hobbes develops the way out of the state of

nature into civil government by mutual contracts.

Hobbes described the concept in the Latin phrasebellum omnium contra omnes, in

his workde Cive.

Locke's view on the state of nature

John Locke considers the state of nature in hisSecond Treatise on Civil

Governmentwritten around the time of the Engagement controversy in England

during the 1680s. For Locke, "The state of Nature has a law of Nature to govern it",

and that law is Reason. Locke believes that reason teaches that "no one ought to

harm another in his life, health, liberty or possessions"; and that transgressions of

this may be punished. This view of the state of nature is partly deduced from

Christian belief (unlike Hobbes, whose philosophy is not dependent upon any prior

theology): the reason we may not harm another is that we are all the possessions of

God and do not own ourselves.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_philosophyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contracthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_statehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_republicanismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Hobbeshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_(book)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_(book)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_nature#cite_note-Leviathan-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_nature#cite_note-Leviathan-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_nature#cite_note-Leviathan-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_righthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nasty,_brutish,_and_shorthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellum_omnium_contra_omneshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellum_omnium_contra_omneshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellum_omnium_contra_omneshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Civehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Civehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Civehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lockehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Treatise_on_Civil_Governmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Treatise_on_Civil_Governmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Treatise_on_Civil_Governmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Treatise_on_Civil_Governmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engagement_controversyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engagement_controversyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Treatise_on_Civil_Governmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Treatise_on_Civil_Governmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lockehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Civehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellum_omnium_contra_omneshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nasty,_brutish,_and_shorthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_righthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_nature#cite_note-Leviathan-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_(book)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Hobbeshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_republicanismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_statehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contracthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_philosophy

8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)

2/21

Although it may be natural to assume that Locke was responding to Hobbes, Locke

never refers to Hobbes by name, and may instead have been responding to other

writers of the day, like Robert Filmer.[2]In fact, Locke's First Treatise is entirely a

response to Filmers Patriarcha, and takes a step by step method to refuting Filmer's

theory set out in Patriarcha. The conservative party at the time had rallied behind

Filmers Patriarcha, whereas the Whigs, scared of another prosecution of anglicans

and protestants, rallied behind the theory set out by Locke in his Two Treatises of

Government; as it gives a clear theory as to why you should be allowed to overthrow

a monarchy who abuses the trust set in it by the people.

Rousseau

Hobbes's view was challenged in the eighteenth century by Jean-Jacques

Rousseau, who claimed that Hobbes was taking socialized persons and simplyimagining them living outside of the society in which they were raised. He affirmed

instead that people were neither good nor bad. Men knew neither vice nor virtue

since they had almost no dealings with each other. Their bad habits are the products

of civilization. Nevertheless the conditions of nature forced people to enter a state of

society by establishing a civil society.

Social Contract Theory:

Thomas Hobbes's Leviathan(1651)

The first modern philosopher to articulate a detailed contract theory was Thomas

Hobbes (1588-1679). According to Hobbes, the lives of individuals in the state of

nature were "nasty, brutish and short", a state where self-interest and the absence of

rights and contracts prevented the 'social', or society. Life was 'anarchic' (without

leadership/ the concept of sovereignty). Individuals in the state of nature were

apolitical and asocial. This state of nature is followed by the social contract.

The social contract was an 'occurence' during which individuals came together andceded some of their individual rights so that others would cede theirs (e.g. person A

gives up his/her right to kill person B if person B does the same). This resulted in the

establishment of society, and by extension, the state, a sovereign entity (like the

individuals, now under its rule, used to be) which was to protect these new rights

which were now to regulate societal interactions. Society was thus no longer

anarchic.

But the state system, which grew out of the social contract, was anarchic (without

leadership). Just as the individuals in the state of nature had been sovereigns andthus guided by self-interest and the absence of rights, so states now acted in their

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Filmerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_nature#cite_note-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_nature#cite_note-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_nature#cite_note-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Jacques_Rousseauhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Jacques_Rousseauhttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=State_of_society&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=State_of_society&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_societyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Hobbeshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Hobbeshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Hobbeshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Hobbeshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_societyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=State_of_society&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=State_of_society&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Jacques_Rousseauhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Jacques_Rousseauhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_nature#cite_note-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Filmer

8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)

3/21

self-interest in competition with each other. Just like the state of nature, states were

thus bound to be in conflict because there was no sovereign over and above the

state (i.e. more powerful) capable of imposing social-contract laws.

Ius naturaleis Latin for "natural law", the laws common to all beings. Roman jurists

wondered why theius gentium(the laws which applied to foreigners and citizens

alike) was in general accepted by all people living in the Empire. Their conclusion

was that these laws made sense to a reasonable person and thus were followed. All

laws which would make sense to a normal person were called ius naturale.

Slavery for example was part of the empire-wide ius gentiumbecause slavery was

known and accepted as a fact in all parts of the known world, nevertheless slavery

does not make sense to a reasonable person. Forcing people to work for others was

not natural. So, slavery was part of the ius gentiumbut not of the ius naturale.The ius naturaleof the Roman jurists is not the same as implied by the modern

sense of natural law as something derived from pure reason. As Sir Henry Sumner

Maine puts it, "it was never thought of as founded on quite untested principles. The

notion was that it underlay existing law and must be looked for through it"

Natural law or the law of nature(Latin:lex naturalis) is a theory that posits the

existence of a law whose content is set by nature and that therefore has validity

everywhere.[1]The phrase natural lawis opposed to the positive law (which is man-

made) of a given political community, society, or nation-state, and thus can functionas a standard by which to criticize that law.[2]In natural law jurisprudence, on the

other hand, the content of positive law cannot be known without some reference to

the natural law (or something like it). Used in this way, natural law can be invoked to

criticize decisions about the statutes, but less so to criticize the law itself. Some use

natural law synonymously with natural justice or natural right (Latin ius naturale),

although most contemporary political and legal theorists separate the two.

As used by Thomas Hobbes in his treatisesLeviathanandDe Cive, natural law is

"a precept, or general rule, found out by reason, by which a man is forbidden to dothat which is destructive of his life, or takes away the means of preserving the same;

and to omit that by which he thinks it may best be preserved."

John Locke's Second Treatise of Government(1689)

John Locke's conception of the social contract differed from Hobbes' in several ways,

but retained the central notion that persons in a state of nature would willingly come

together to form a state. Locke believed that individuals in a state of nature would

have stronger moral limits on their action than accepted by Hobbes, but recognized

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latinhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ius_gentiumhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ius_gentiumhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ius_gentiumhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slaveryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lex_naturalis#cite_note-Ref-1-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lex_naturalis#cite_note-Ref-1-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lex_naturalis#cite_note-Ref-1-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation-statehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lex_naturalis#cite_note-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lex_naturalis#cite_note-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lex_naturalis#cite_note-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_justicehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latinhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Hobbeshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_(book)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_(book)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_(book)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Civehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Civehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Civehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precepthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lockehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lockehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precepthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Civehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_(book)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Hobbeshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latinhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_justicehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lex_naturalis#cite_note-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation-statehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lex_naturalis#cite_note-Ref-1-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slaveryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ius_gentiumhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin

8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)

4/21

that people would still live in fear of one another. Locke argued that individuals would

agree to form a state that would provide a "neutral judge", and that could therefore

protect the lives, liberty, and property of those who lived within it. While Hobbes

argued for near-absolute authority, Locke argued that laws could only be legitimate if

they sought to achieve the common good. Locke also believed that people will do the

right thing as a group, and that all people have natural rights.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau's Du Contrat Social(1762)

Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778), in his influential 1762 treatiseThe Social

Contract, outlined a different version of social contract theory, based on popular

sovereignty. Although Rousseau wrote that the British were perhaps at the time the

freest people on earth, he did not approve of their representative government.

Rousseau believed that liberty was possible only where there was direct rule by thepeople as a whole in lawmaking, where popular sovereignty was indivisible

and inalienable. Citizens must, in at least some circumstances, be able to choose

together the fundamental rules by which they would live, and be able to revise those

rules on later occasions if they choose to do so - something the English people as a

whole were unable to do.

Rousseau's political theory has some points in common with Locke's individualism,

but departs from it in his development of the "luminous conception" (which he

credited to Diderot) of the general will. Rousseau argues a citizen can bean egoist and decide that his personal interest should override the collective interest.

However, as part of a collective body, the individual citizen puts aside his egoism to

create a "general will", which is popular sovereignty itself. Popular sovereignty (i.e.,

the rule of law), thus decides what is good for society as a whole, and the individual

(including the administrative head of state, who could be a monarch) must bow to it,

or be forced to bow to it:

[The social contract] can be reduced to the following terms: Each of us puts his

person and all his power in common under the supreme direction of the general will;and in a body we receive each member as an indivisible part of the whole.[3]

Rousseau's striking phrase that man must "be forced to be free"[4]should be

understood this way: since the indivisible and inalienable popular sovereignty

decides what is good for the whole, then if an individual lapses back into his ordinary

egoism and breaks the law, he will be forced to listen to what they decided as a

member of the collectivity (i.e. as citizens). Thus, the law, inasmuch as it is voted by

the people's representatives, is not a limitation of individual freedom, but its

expression; and enforcement of law, including criminal law, is not a restriction on

individual liberty, as the individual, as a citizen, explicitly agreed to be constrained if,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Jacques_Rousseauhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Contract_(Rousseau)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Contract_(Rousseau)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Contract_(Rousseau)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Contract_(Rousseau)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popular_sovereigntyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popular_sovereigntyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representative_governmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inalienablehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diderothttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_willhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egoisthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_willhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contract_theory#cite_note-2http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contract_theory#cite_note-2http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contract_theory#cite_note-2http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contract_theory#cite_note-3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contract_theory#cite_note-3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contract_theory#cite_note-3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizenhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizenhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contract_theory#cite_note-3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contract_theory#cite_note-2http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_willhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egoisthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_willhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diderothttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inalienablehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representative_governmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popular_sovereigntyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popular_sovereigntyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Contract_(Rousseau)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Contract_(Rousseau)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Jacques_Rousseau

8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)

5/21

as a private individual, he did not respect his own will as formulated in the general

will. Because laws represent the restraints of civil freedom, they represent the leap

made from humans in the state of nature into civil society. In this sense, the law is a

civilizing force, and therefore Rousseau believed that the laws that govern a people

helped to mold their character.

MARX:

ALIENATION

in the labour process

According to Marx, alienation is a systematic result of capitalism. Marx's Theory of

Alienation is founded upon his observation that in emerging industrial productionunder capitalism, workers inevitably lose control over their lives and destinies by

being deprived of control over their actions. Workers never become autonomous,

self-realized human beings, but are directed, diverted, into the ways in which

the bourgeois want workers to behave. Alienation in capitalist societies occurs

because in work each contributes to the common wealth, but can only express this

fundamentally social aspect of individuality through a production system that is not

publicly(socially), but privately owned, and for which each individual functions, not as

a social being, but as an instrument.Marx identifies four types of alienation in labour under capitalism.[1]These include

the alienation of the worker from his or her species essence as a human being, not

a cog in a machine; alienation among workers, since capitalism reduces labour to a

commercial commodity to be traded on the market, rather than a social relationship;

alienation of the worker from the product, since its design and production are

appropriated by the capitalist class and escape the worker's control; and alienation

from the act of production itself, so that work boils down to an endless sequence of

discrete, repetitive, trivial, and meaningless motions, offering little, if any, intrinsicsatisfaction.

influence from Hegel and Feuerbach

Alienation is a foundational claim in Marxist theory. Hegel described a succession of

historic stages in the humanGeist(Spirit), by which that Spirit progresses towards

perfect self-understanding, and away from ignorance. In Marx's reaction to Hegel,

these two, idealist poles are replaced with materialist categories: spiritual ignorance

becomes alienation, and the transcendent end of history becomes man's realisation

of his species-being; triumph over alienation and establishment of an objectivelybetter society.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourgeoishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_(economics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_alienation#cite_note-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_alienation#cite_note-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_alienation#cite_note-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geisthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geisthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geisthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hegelhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Materialisthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcendence_(philosophy)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_historyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_historyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcendence_(philosophy)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Materialisthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hegelhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geisthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_alienation#cite_note-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_(economics)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourgeois

8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)

6/21

DIALECTICS:

Hegelian dialectic

Hegelian dialectic, usually presented in a three-fold manner, was stated by Heinrich

Moritz Chalybus as comprising three dialectical stages of development: a thesis,

giving rise to its reaction, an antithesis, which contradicts or negates the thesis, and

the tension between the two being resolved by means of a synthesis.

Although this model is often named after Hegel, he himself never used that specific

formulation. Hegel ascribed that terminology to Kant.[18]Carrying on Kant's

work, Fichtegreatly elaborated on the synthesis model, and popularized it.

On the other hand, Hegel did use a three-valued logical model that is very similar tothe antithesis model, but Hegel's most usual terms were: Abstract-Negative-

Concrete. Sometimes Hegel would use the terms, Immediate-Mediated-Concrete.

Hegel used these terms hundreds of times throughout his works.[19]

The formula, Thesis-Antithesis-Synthesis, does not explain why the Thesis requires

an Antithesis. However, the formula, Abstract-Negative-Concrete, suggests a flaw in

any initial thesisit is too abstract and lacks the negative of trial, error and

experience. The same applies to the formula, Immediate-Mediated-Concrete. For

Hegel, the Concrete, the Synthesis, the Absolute, must always pass through thephase of the Negative, that is, Mediation. This is the actual essence of what is

popularly called Hegelian Dialectics.

To describe the activity of overcoming the negative, Hegel also often used the

termAufhebung, variously translated into English as "sublation" or "overcoming," to

conceive of the working of the dialectic. Roughly, the term indicates preserving the

useful portion of an idea, thing, society, etc., while moving beyond its limitations.

(Jacques Derrida's preferred French translation of the term was relever).[20]

In theLogic, for instance, Hegel describes a dialectic of existence: first, existence

must be posited as pure Being (Sein); but pure Being, upon examination, is found to

be indistinguishable from Nothing (Nichts). When it is realized that what is coming

into being is, at the same time, also returning to nothing (in life, for example, one's

living is also a dying), both Being and Nothing are united as Becoming.[21]

As in the Socratic dialectic, Hegel claimed to proceed by making implicit

contradictions explicit: each stage of the process is the product of contradictions

inherent or implicit in the preceding stage. For Hegel, the whole of history is one

tremendous dialectic, major stages of which chart a progression from self-alienation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_Moritz_Chalyb%C3%A4ushttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_Moritz_Chalyb%C3%A4ushttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thesis,_antithesis,_synthesishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thesis,_antithesis,_synthesishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thesis,_antithesis,_synthesishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hegelhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hegelhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-17http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-17http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-17http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fichtehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thesis,_antithesis,_synthesishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thesis,_antithesis,_synthesishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-18http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-18http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-18http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sublationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sublationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sublationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Derridahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-19http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-19http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-19http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_of_Logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_of_Logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_of_Logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-20http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-20http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-20http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-20http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_of_Logichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-19http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Derridahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sublationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-18http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thesis,_antithesis,_synthesishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thesis,_antithesis,_synthesishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fichtehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-17http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hegelhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hegelhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thesis,_antithesis,_synthesishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thesis,_antithesis,_synthesishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thesis,_antithesis,_synthesishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_Moritz_Chalyb%C3%A4ushttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_Moritz_Chalyb%C3%A4us

8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)

7/21

as slavery to self-unification and realization as the rational, constitutional state of free

and equal citizens. The Hegelian dialectic cannot be mechanically applied for any

chosen thesis. Critics argue that the selection of any antithesis, other than the logical

negation of the thesis, is subjective. Then, if the logical negation is used as the

antithesis, there is no rigorous way to derive a synthesis. In practice, when an

antithesis is selected to suit the user's subjective purpose, the resulting

"contradictions" are rhetorical, not logical, and the resulting synthesis is not

rigorously defensible against a multitude of other possible syntheses. The problem

with the Fichtean "Thesis-Antithesis-Synthesis" model is that it implies that

contradictions or negations come from outside of things. Hegel's point is that they

are inherent in and internal to things. This conception of dialectics derives ultimately

from Heraclitus.

Hegel has outlined that the purpose of dialectics is "to study things in their own being

and movement and thus to demonstrate the finitude of the partial categories of

understanding"[22]

One important dialectical principle for Hegel is the transition from quantity to quality,

which he terms the Measure. The measure is the qualitative quantum, the quantum

is the existence of quantity.[23]

Another important principle for Hegel is the negation of the negation, which he

also terms Aufhebung(sublation): Something is only what it is in its relation toanother, but by the negation of the negation this something incorporates the

other into itself. The dialectical movement involves two moments that negate

each other, a somewhat and an another. As a result of the negation of the

negation, "something becomes an other; this other is itself somewhat; therefore

it likewise becomes an other, and so on ad infinitum".[26]Something in its

passage into other only joins with itself, it is self-related.[27]In becoming there

are two moments:[28]coming-to-be and ceasing-to-be: by sublation, i.e. negation

of the negation, being passes over into nothing, it ceases to be, but something

new shows up, is coming to be. What is sublated (aufgehoben) on the one hand

ceases to be and is put to an end, but on the other hand it is preserved and

maintained.[29]In dialectics, a totality transform itself, it is self-related.

Marxist dialectics

Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels believed Hegel was "standing on his head," and

endeavoured to put him back on his feet, ridding Hegel's logic of its orientation

towards philosophical idealism, and conceiving what is now known as materialist

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master-slave_dialectichttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rational_state&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_statehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetorichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heraclitushttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-21http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-21http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-21http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-25http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-25http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-25http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-26http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-26http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-26http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-27http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-27http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-27http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-28http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-28http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-28http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marxhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Engelshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idealismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idealismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Engelshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marxhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-28http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-27http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-26http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-25http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-21http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heraclitushttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetorichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_statehttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rational_state&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master-slave_dialectic

8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)

8/21

or Marxist dialectics. This is what Marx had to say about the difference between

Hegel's dialectics and his own:

My dialectic method is not only different from the Hegelian, but is its direct

opposite. To Hegel, the life-process of the human brain, i.e. the process ofthinking, which, under the name of 'the Idea,' he even transforms into an

independent subject, is the demiurgos of the real world, and the real world is

only the external, phenomenal form of 'the Idea.' With me, on the contrary, the

ideal is nothing else than the material world reflected by the human mind, and

translated into forms of thought." (Capital, Volume 1, Moscow, 1970, p. 29).

Nevertheless, Marx "openly avowed [himself] the pupil of that mighty thinker"

and even "coquetted with modes of expression peculiar to him."[30]

In the work of Marx and Engels the dialectical approach to the study of history

became intertwined with historical materialism, the school of thought exemplified

by the works of Marx, Engels, and Lenin. (Marx himself never referred to

"historical materialism.") A dialectical methodology came to be seen as the vital

foundation for any Marxist politics, through the work of Karl Korsch, Georg

Lukcs and certain members of the Frankfurt School. Under Stalin, Marxist

dialectics became synonymous with what was called "diamat" (short

for dialectical materialism). The "diamat" was a social theory coined by 19th

century philosophy Joseph Dietzgen which emphasized commodities and theeffects of their exchange over time. Dietzgen used his theory sparingly to

explain the nature of socialism and social development, but it was never

researched academically until the Soviet Union indoctrinated the philosophy.

Some Soviet academics, most notably Evald Ilyenkov, continued with

unorthodox philosophical studies of the Marxist dialectic, as did a number of

thinkers in the West. One of the best known North American dialectical

philosophers is Bertell Ollman, Professor of Political Science at New York

University.Engels argued that all of nature is dialectical. In Anti-Dhring he contends that

negation of negation is

A very simple process which is taking place everywhere and every day, which

any child can understand as soon as it is stripped of the veil of mystery in which

it was enveloped by the old idealist philosophy.[32]

In Dialectics of Nature, Engels states,

Probably the same gentlemen who up to now have decried the transformation ofquantity into quality as mysticism and incomprehensible transcendentalism will

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxisthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-29http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-29http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-29http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_materialismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Korschhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georg_Luk%C3%A1cshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georg_Luk%C3%A1cshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankfurt_Schoolhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalinhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectical_materialismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Dietzgenhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviethttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evald_Ilyenkovhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertell_Ollmanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Universityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Universityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-D%C3%BChringhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-31http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-31http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-31http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectics_of_Naturehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectics_of_Naturehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-31http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-D%C3%BChringhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Universityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Universityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertell_Ollmanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evald_Ilyenkovhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviethttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Dietzgenhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectical_materialismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalinhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankfurt_Schoolhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georg_Luk%C3%A1cshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georg_Luk%C3%A1cshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Korschhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_materialismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-29http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxist

8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)

9/21

now declare that it is indeed something quite self-evident, trivial, and

commonplace, which they have long employed, and so they have been taught

nothing new. But to have formulated for the first time in its universally valid form

a general law of development of nature, society, and thought, will always remain

an act of historic importance.[33]

Marxists view dialectics as a framework for development in which contradiction

plays the central role as the source of development. This is perhaps best

exemplified in Marx's Capital, which outlines two of his central theories: that of

the theory of surplus value and the materialist conception of history.

In Capital, Marx had the following to say about his dialectical methodology:

In its rational form it is a scandal and abomination to bourgeoisdom and its

doctrinaire professors, because it includes in its comprehension an affirmativerecognition of the existing state of things, at the same time also, the recognition

of the negation of that state, of its inevitable breaking up; because it regards

every historically developed social form as in fluid movement, and therefore

takes into account its transient nature not less than its momentary existence;

because it lets nothing impose upon it, and is in its essence critical and

revolutionary.[34]

At the heart of Marxist dialectics is the idea of contradiction, with class struggle

playing the central role in social and political life. Marx and subsequent Marxists

also identify other historically important contradictions, such as those between

mental and manual labor and town and country. Contradiction is the key to all

other categories and principles of dialectical development: development by

passage of quantitative change into qualitative ones, interruption of

gradualness, leaps, negation of the initial moment of development and negation

of this very negation, and repetition at a higher level of some of the features and

aspects of the original state.

PLATO THE STATE

Plato's philosophical views had many societal implications, especially on the idea of

an ideal state or government. There is some discrepancy between his early and later

views. Some of the most famous doctrines are contained in the Republicduring his

middle period, as well as in theLawsand the Statesman. However, because Plato

wrote dialogues, it is assumed that Socrates is often speaking for Plato. This

assumption may not be true in all cases.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-32http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-32http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-32http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-33http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-33http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-33http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_statehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_(dialogue)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_(dialogue)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_(dialogue)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_(dialogue)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_statehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-33http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic#cite_note-32

8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)

10/21

Plato, through the words of Socrates, asserts that societies have a tripartite class

structure corresponding to the appetite/spirit/reason structure of the individual soul.

The appetite/spirit/reason stand for different parts of the body. The body parts

symbolize the castes of society.[30]

ProductiveWhich represents the abdomen. (Workers) the labourers,

carpenters, plumbers, masons, merchants, farmers, ranchers, etc. These

correspond to the "appetite" part of the soul.

ProtectiveWhich represents the chest. (Warriors or Guardians) those who are

adventurous, strong and brave; in the armed forces. These correspond to the

"spirit" part of the soul.

GoverningWhich represents the head. (Rulers or Philosopher Kings) those

who are intelligent, rational, self-controlled, in love with wisdom, well suited tomake decisions for the community. These correspond to the "reason" part of the

soul and are very few.

According to this model, the principles of Athenian democracy (as it existed in his

day) are rejected as only a few are fit to rule. Instead of rhetoric and persuasion,

Plato says reason and wisdom should govern.

Plato describes these "philosopher kings" as "those who love the sight of truth"

(Republic475c) and supports the idea with the analogy of a captain and his ship or a

doctor and his medicine. According to him, sailing and health are not things that

everyone is qualified to practice by nature. A large part of the Republicthen

addresses how the educational system should be set up to produce these

philosopher kings.

However, it must be taken into account that the ideal city outlined in the Republicis

qualified by Socrates as the ideal luxuriouscity, examined to determine how it is that

injustice and justice grow in a city (Republic372e). According to Socrates, the "true"

and "healthy" city is instead the one first outlined in book II of the Republic, 369c

372d, containing farmers, craftsmen, merchants, and wage-earners, but lacking the

guardian class of philosopher-kings as well as delicacies such as "perfumed oils,

incense, prostitutes, and pastries", in addition to paintings, gold, ivory, couches, a

multitude of occupations such as poets and hunters, and war.

In addition, the ideal city is used as an image to illuminate the state of one's soul, or

the will, reason, and desires combined in the human body. Socrates is attempting to

make an image of a rightly ordered human, and then later goes on to describe the

different kinds of humans that can be observed, from tyrants to lovers of money in

various kinds of cities. The ideal city is not promoted, but only used to magnify the

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plato#cite_note-29http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plato#cite_note-29http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plato#cite_note-29http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athenian_democracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_willhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpersonal_attractionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpersonal_attractionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_willhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athenian_democracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plato#cite_note-29

8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)

11/21

different kinds of individual humans and the state of their soul. However,

the philosopher king image was used by many after Plato to justify their personal

political beliefs. The philosophic soul according to Socrates has reason, will, and

desires united in virtuous harmony. A philosopher has the moderate love

for wisdom and the courage to act according to wisdom. Wisdom is knowledge about

the Good or the right relations between all that exists.

Wherein it concerns states and rulers, Plato has made interesting arguments. For

instance he asks which is better - a bad democracy or a country reigned by a tyrant.

He argues that it is better to be ruled by a bad tyrant, than be a bad democracy

(since here all the people are now responsible for such actions, rather than one

individual committing many bad deeds.) This is emphasised within theRepublicas

Plato describes the event of mutiny onboard a ship.[31]Plato suggests the ships crew

to be in line with the democratic rule of many and the captain, although inhibited

through ailments, the tyrant. Plato's description of this event is parallel to that of

democracy within the state and the inherent problems that arise.

According to Plato, a state which is made up of different kinds of souls, will overall

decline from an aristocracy (rule by the best) to a timocracy (rule by the honorable),

then to an oligarchy (rule by the few), then to a democracy (rule by the people), and

finally to tyranny (rule by one person, rule by a tyrant)

ARISTOTLE MATTER AND FORM

Substance, potentiality and actuality

Aristotle examines the concept of substance and essence (ousia) in his Metaphysics,

Book VII and he concludes that a particular substance is a combination of both

matter and form. As he proceeds to the book VIII, he concludes that the matter of the

substance is the substratum or the stuff of which it is composed, e.g. the matter of

the house are the bricks, stones, timbers etc., or whatever constitutes

the potentialhouse. While the form of the substance, is the actualhouse, namely

'covering for bodies and chattels' or any other differentia (see also predicables). The

formula that gives the components is the account of the matter, and the formula that

gives the differentia is the account of the form.[22]

With regard to the change (kinesis) and its causes now, as he defines in

his Physics and On Generation and Corruption 319b-320a, he distinguishes the

coming to be from: 1) growth and diminution, which is change in quantity; 2)

locomotion, which is change in space; and 3) alteration, which is change in quality.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosopher_kinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moderatehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisdomhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Couragehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodness_and_value_theoryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plato#cite_note-30http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plato#cite_note-30http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plato#cite_note-30http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristocracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timocracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligarchyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyrannyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ousiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ousiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ousiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Material_substratumhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genus-differentia_definitionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predicableshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotle#cite_note-21http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotle#cite_note-21http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotle#cite_note-21http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinesishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinesishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinesishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_(Aristotle)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Generation_and_Corruptionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Generation_and_Corruptionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_(Aristotle)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinesishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotle#cite_note-21http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predicableshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genus-differentia_definitionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Material_substratumhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ousiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyrannyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligarchyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timocracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristocracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plato#cite_note-30http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodness_and_value_theoryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledgehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Couragehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisdomhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moderatehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosopher_king

8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)

12/21

The coming to be is a change where nothing persists of which the resultant is a

property. In that particular change he introduces the concept of potentiality (dynamis)

and actuality (entelecheia) in association with the matter and the form.

Referring to potentiality, this is what a thing is capable of doing, or being acted upon,if it is not prevented by something else. For example, the seed of a plant in the soil is

potentially (dynamei) plant, and if is not prevented by something, it will become a

plant. Potentially beings can either 'act' (poiein) or 'be acted upon' (paschein), which

can be either innate or learned. For example, the eyes possess the potentiality of

sight (innate being acted upon), while the capability of playing the flute can be

possessed by learning (exercise acting).

Actuality is the fulfillment of the end of the potentiality. Because the end (telos) is the

principle of every change, and for the sake of the end exists potentiality, thereforeactuality is the end. Referring then to our previous example, we could say that

actuality is when the seed of the plant becomes a plant.

" For that for the sake of which a thing is, is its principle, and the becoming is for the

sake of the end; and the actuality is the end, and it is for the sake of this that the

potentiality is acquired. For animals do not see in order that they may have sight, but

they have sight that they may see."[23]

In conclusion, the matter of the house is its potentiality and the form is its actuality.

The formal cause (aitia) then of that change from potential to actual house, is

the reason (logos) of the house builder and the final cause is the end, namely the

house itself. Then Aristotle proceeds and concludes that the actuality is prior to

potentiality in formula, in time and in substantiality.

With this definition of the particular substance (i.e., matter and form), Aristotle tries to

solve the problem of the unity of the beings, e.g., what is that makes the man one?

Since, according to Plato there are two Ideas: animal and biped, how then is man a

unity? However, according to Aristotle, the potential being (matter) and the actual

one (form) are one and the same thing.

CONCEPTS

IDEOLOGY- LEFT/RIGHT

Historical origin of the terms

The termsRightandLeftrefer to political affiliations which originated early in

the French Revolutionary era of 1789-1796, and referred originally to the seatingarrangements in the various legislative bodies of France. The aristocracy sat on the

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entelecheiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entelecheiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entelecheiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Poiein&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Poiein&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Poiein&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Paschein&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Paschein&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Paschein&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotle#cite_note-22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotle#cite_note-22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotle#cite_note-22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_causehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_causehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_politicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_politicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_politicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_politicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_politicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_politicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_the_French_Revolution#Governmental_structureshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristocracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristocracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_the_French_Revolution#Governmental_structureshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_politicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_politicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_causehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_causehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotle#cite_note-22http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Paschein&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Poiein&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entelecheiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamis

8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)

13/21

right of the Speaker(traditionally the seat of honor) and the commoners sat on the

Left, hence the terms Right-wing politics and Left-wing politics.

Originally, the defining point on the ideological spectrum was theancien rgime("old

order"). "The Right" thus implied support for aristocratic or royal interests, and thechurch, while "The Left" implied support for republicanism, secularism and civil

liberties.[2]Because the political franchise at the start of the revolution was relatively

narrow, the original "Left" represented mainly the interests of the bourgeoisie, the

rising capitalist class. At that time, support for laissez-faire capitalism and Free

markets were counted as being on the left; today in most Western countries these

views would be characterized as being on the Right.

As the franchise expanded over the next several years, it became clear that there

was something to the left of that original "Left": the precursorsof socialism and communism, advocating the interests of workers and peasants.

Bureaucracy

Bureaucracy is the collective organizational structure, procedures, protocols, and

set of regulations in place to manage activity, usually in large organizations and

government. As opposed to adhocracy, it is represented by standardized procedure(rule-following) that guides the execution of most or all processes within the body;

formal division of powers; hierarchy; and relationships, intended to anticipate needs

and improve efficiency.

Bureaucracy is a concept in sociology and political science referring to the way that

the administrative execution and enforcement of legal rules are socially organized.

Four structural concepts are central to any definition of bureaucracy:

1. a well-defined division of administrative labour among persons and offices,

2. a personnel system with consistent patterns of recruitment and stable linear

careers,

3. a hierarchy among offices, such that the authority and status are differentially

distributed among actors, and

4. formal and informal networks that connect organizational actors to one

another through flows of information and patterns of cooperation.

Examples of everyday bureaucracies include governments, armed

forces, corporations, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), intergovernmental

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speakerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commonershttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_politicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_politicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancien_r%C3%A9gimehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancien_r%C3%A9gimehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancien_r%C3%A9gimehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republicanismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secularismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_libertyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_libertyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_spectrum#cite_note-Knapp-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_spectrum#cite_note-Knapp-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_franchisehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourgeoisiehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourgeoisiehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laissez-faire_capitalismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_markethttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_markethttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffragehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organizational_structurehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actionshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protocolhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulationshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Managementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adhocracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armed_forcehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armed_forcehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-governmental_organizationshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intergovernmental_organizationshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intergovernmental_organizationshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-governmental_organizationshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armed_forcehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armed_forcehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adhocracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Managementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulationshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protocolhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actionshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organizational_structurehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffragehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_markethttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_markethttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laissez-faire_capitalismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourgeoisiehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourgeoisiehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_franchisehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_spectrum#cite_note-Knapp-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_libertyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_libertyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secularismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republicanismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancien_r%C3%A9gimehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_politicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_politicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commonershttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speaker

8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)

14/21

organizations (IGOs),hospitals, courts, ministries, social clubs, sports

leagues, professional associations and academic institutions.

Max Weber

Max Weber has probably been one of the most influential users of the word inits social science sense. He is well-known for his study of bureaucratization of

society; many aspects of modern public administration go back to him; a classic,

hierarchically organized civil service of the continental type is if perhaps

mistakenly called Weberian civil serviceseveral different years between 1818 and

1860, prior to Weber's birth in 1864.

Weber described the ideal type bureaucracy in positive terms, considering it to be a

more rational and efficient form of organization than the alternatives that preceded it,

which he characterized ascharismatic dominationandtraditional domination.According to his terminology, bureaucracy is part of legal domination. However, he

also emphasized that bureaucracy becomes inefficient when a decision must be

adopted to an individual case.

According to Weber, the attributes of modern bureaucracy include its impersonality,

concentration of the means of administration, a leveling effect on social and

economic differences and implementation of a system of authority that is practically

indestructible.

Weber's analysis of bureaucracy concerns:

the historical and administrative reasons for the process of bureaucratization

(especially in the Western civilisation)

the impact of the rule of law upon the functioning of bureaucratic organisations

the typical personal orientation and occupational position of a bureaucratic

officials as a status group

the most important attributes and consequences of bureaucracy in the modern

world

A bureaucratic organization is governed by the following seven principles:

1. official business is conducted on a continuous basis

2. official business is conducted with strict accordance to the following rules:

1. the duty of each official to do certain types of work is delimited in terms

of impersonal criteria

2. the official is given the authority necessary to carry out his assigned

functions

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intergovernmental_organizationshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hospitalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Courthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_(government_department)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_clubshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sports_leaguehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sports_leaguehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_associationshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_institutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Weberhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_administrationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_servicehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continentalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideal_typehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charismatic_dominationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charismatic_dominationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charismatic_dominationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditional_dominationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditional_dominationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditional_dominationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_dominationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_worldhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Personal_orientation&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Occupational_position&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_grouphttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_grouphttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Occupational_position&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Personal_orientation&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_worldhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_dominationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditional_dominationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charismatic_dominationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideal_typehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continentalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_servicehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_administrationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Weberhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_institutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_associationshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sports_leaguehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sports_leaguehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_clubshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_(government_department)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Courthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hospitalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intergovernmental_organizations

8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)

15/21

3. the means of coercion at his disposal are strictly limited and conditions

of their use strictly defined

3. every official's responsibilities and authority are part of a vertical hierarchy of

authority, with respective rights of supervision and appeal

4. officials do not own the resources necessary for the performance of their

assigned functions but are accountable for their use of these resources

5. official and private business and income are strictly separated

6. offices cannot be appropriated by their incumbents (inherited, sold, etc.)

7. official business is conducted on the basis of written documents

A bureaucratic official:

is personally free and appointed to his position on the basis of conduct

exercises the authority delegated to him in accordance with impersonal rules, and

his or her loyalty is enlisted on behalf of the faithful execution of his official duties

appointment and job placement are dependent upon his or her technical

qualifications

administrative work is a full-time occupation

work is rewarded by a regular salary and prospects of advancement in a lifetime

career

An official must exercise his or her judgment and his or her skills, but his or her dutyis to place these at the service of a higher authority; ultimately he/she is responsible

only for the impartial execution of assigned tasks and must sacrifice his or her

personal judgment if it runs counter to his or her official duties.

Weber's work has been continued by many, like Robert Michels with his Iron Law of

Oligarchy.

Criticism

As Max Weber himself noted, real bureaucracy will be less optimal and effective than

his ideal type model. Each of Weber's seven principles can degenerate:[citation needed]

Competences can be unclear and used contrary to the spirit of the law;

sometimes a decision itself may be considered more important than its effect;

Nepotism, corruption, political infighting and other degenerations can counter the

rule of impersonality and can create a recruitment and promotion system not

based on meritocracy but rather onoligarchy;

Even a non-degenerated bureaucracy can be affected by common problems:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Michelshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Law_of_Oligarchyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Law_of_Oligarchyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_neededhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_neededhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_neededhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nepotismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligarchyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligarchyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nepotismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_neededhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Law_of_Oligarchyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Law_of_Oligarchyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Michels

8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)

16/21

Overspecialization, making individual officials not aware of larger consequences

of their actions

Rigidity and inertia of procedures, making decision-making slow or even

impossible when facing some unusual case, and similarly delaying change,

evolution and adaptation of old procedures to new circumstances;

A phenomenon of group thinking- zealotry, loyalty and lack of critical

thinking regarding the organisation which is perfectand always correctby

definition, making the organisation unable to change and realise its own mistakes

and limitations;

Disregard for dissenting opinions, even when such views suit the available data

better than the opinion of the majority;

A phenomenon ofCatch-22(named after a famous book by Joseph Heller) - as

bureaucracy creates more and more rules and procedures, their complexity rises

and coordination diminishes, facilitating creation

of contradictory and recursive rules, as described by the saying "the bureaucracy

is expanding to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy".

Not allowing people to use common sense, as everything must be as is written by

the law.

SOVEREIGNITY

Sovereignty is the quality of having supreme, independent authority over a territory.

It can be found in a power to rule and make law that rests on a political fact for which

no purely legal explanation can be provided. The concept has been discussed,

debated and questioned throughout history, from the time of the Romans through to

the present day, although it has changed in its definition, concept, and application

throughout, especially during the Age of Enlightenment. The current notion of state

sovereignty was laid down in the Treaty of Westphalia (1648), which, in relation

to states, codified the basic principles of territorial integrity, border inviolability, and

supremacy of the state (rather than the Church). A sovereign is a supreme

lawmaking authority.

A political viewpoint "that sovereignty is vested not in the people but in the national

state, and that all individuals and associations exist only to enhance the power, the

prestige, and the well-being of the state. The fascist concept of statism, which as

seen as synonymous with the concept of nation, and corporatism repudiates

individualism and exalts the nation as an organic body headed by the Supreme

Leader and nurtured by unity, force, and discipline.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_thinkinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_thinkinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catch-22_(logic)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catch-22_(logic)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catch-22_(logic)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catch-22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Hellerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contradictionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recursionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_Enlightenmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_of_Westphaliahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_statehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_integrityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_philosophyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereigntyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popular_sovereigntyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popular_sovereigntyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereigntyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_philosophyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_integrityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_statehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_of_Westphaliahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_Enlightenmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recursionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contradictionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Hellerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catch-22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catch-22_(logic)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_thinkinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_thinking

8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)

17/21

The key element of sovereignty in the legalistic sense is that

of exclusivity of jurisdiction. Specifically, when a decision is made by a sovereign

entity, it cannot generally be overruled by a higher authority, usually another state.

Internal sovereignty is the relationship between a sovereign power and its ownsubjects. A central concern is legitimacy: by what right does a political body (or

individual) exercise authority over its subjects? Possible answers include: by

the divine right of kings or by social contract (popular sovereignty).

External sovereignty concerns the relationship between a sovereign power and

other states.

AUTHORITY

The definition of authority in contemporary social science is a matter of debate.

According to Michaels, in the Encyclopaedia of Social Sciences, authority is the

capacity, innate or acquired for exercising ascendancy over a group. Other

scientists, however, argue that authority is not a capacity but a relationship. It is

sanctioned power, institutionalized power.

In political philosophy, the jurisdiction of political authority, the location of

sovereignty, the balancing of freedom and authority (cf. Cristi 2005), and the

requirements of political obligations have been core questionsfrom Plato and Aristotle to the present. In many democractic societies, there is an

ongoing discussion regarding the legitimate extent of governmental authority in

general. In the United States, for instance, there is a widespread belief that the

political system as it was instituted by the Founding Fathers should accord the

populace as much freedom as reasonable, and that government should limit its

authority accordingly.

Max Weber, in his sociological work, identified and distinguished three types of

legitimate domination (Herrschaftin German, which generally means 'domination' or'rule'), that have sometimes been rendered in English translation as types of

authority, because domination isn't seen as a political concept in the first place.

Weber defined domination (authority) as the chance of commands being obeyed by

a specifiable group of people. Legitimate authority is that which is recognized as

legitimate and justified by both the ruler and the ruled.

Weber divided legitimate authority into three types:

The first type discussed by Weber isRational-legal authority. It is that form ofauthority which depends for its legitimacy on formal rules and established laws of

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jurisdictionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legitimacy_(political_science)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_right_of_kingshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contracthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popular_sovereigntyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotlehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Weberhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominancehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rational-legal_authorityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rational-legal_authorityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rational-legal_authorityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legitimacy_(political)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legitimacy_(political)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rational-legal_authorityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominancehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Weberhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotlehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popular_sovereigntyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contracthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_right_of_kingshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legitimacy_(political_science)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jurisdiction

8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)

18/21

the state, which are usually written down and are often very complex. The power

of the rational legal authority is mentioned in the constitution. Modern societies

depend on legal-rational authority. Government officials are the best example of

this form of authority, which is prevalent all over the world.

The second type of authority isTraditional authority, which derives from long-

established customs, habits and social structures. When power passes from one

generation to another, then it is known as traditional authority. The right of

hereditary monarchs to rule furnishes an obvious example. The Tudor dynasty in

England and the ruling families of Mewar, in Rajasthan (India) are some

examples of traditional authority.

The third form of authority isCharismatic authority. Here, the charisma of theindividual or the leader plays an important role. Charismatic authority is that

authority which is derived from "the gift of grace" or when the leader claims that

his authority is derived from a "higher power" (e.g. God or natural law or rights) or

"inspiration", that is superior to both the validity of traditional and rational-legal

authority and followers accept this and are willing to follow this higher or inspired

authority, in the place of the authority that they have hitherto been following.

Some of the most prominent examples of charismatic authority can be politicians

or leaders, who come from a movie or entertainment background. These people

become successful, because they use their grace and charm to get more votes

during elections. Examples in this regard can be NT Rama Rao, a matinee idol,

who went on to become one of the most powerful Chief Ministers of Andhra

Pradesh.

History has witnessed several social movements or revolutions, against a system of

traditional or legal-rational authority, which are usually started by Charismatic

authorities. What distinguishes authority, from coercion, force and power on the one

hand and leadership, persuasion and influence on the other hand, is legitimacy.

Superiors feel that they have a right to issue commands; subordinates perceive an

obligation to obey. Social scientists agree that authority is but one of several

resources available, to incumbents in formal positions. For example, a Head of State

is dependent upon a similar nesting of authority. His legitimacy must be

acknowledged, not just by citizens, but by those who control other valued resources:

his immediate staff, his cabinet, military leaders and in the long run, the

administration and political apparatus of the entire society.

LIBERALISM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditional_authorityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditional_authorityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditional_authorityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tudor_dynastyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajasthanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charismatic_authorityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charismatic_authorityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charismatic_authorityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andhra_Pradeshhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andhra_Pradeshhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_movementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coercionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forcehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persuasionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_influencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_influencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persuasionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forcehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coercionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_movementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andhra_Pradeshhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andhra_Pradeshhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charismatic_authorityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajasthanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tudor_dynastyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditional_authority

8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)

19/21

is the belief in the importance of individual freedom. This belief is widely accepted

today throughout the world, and was recognized as an important value by many

philosophers throughout history. Modern liberalism has its roots in the Age of

Enlightenment and rejects many foundational assumptions that dominated most

earlier theories of government, such as the Divine Right of Kings, hereditary status,

and established religion. John Locke is often credited with the philosophical

foundations of modern liberalism. He wrote "no one ought to harm another in his life,

health, liberty, or possessions."

The philosophy of classical liberalism in the Libertarian sense of the phrase includes

a belief in rational self-interest, property rights, natural rights, civil liberties, individual

freedom, equality under the law,limited government, and free markets.

Classical liberalism places a particular emphasis on the sovereignty of the individual,with private property rights being seen as essential to individual liberty. This forms

the philosophical basis for laissez-faire public policy. The ideology of the

original classical liberalsargued against direct democracy "for there is nothing in the

bare idea of majority rule to show that majorities will always respect the rights of

property or maintain rule of law.

Classical liberalism holds that individual rights are natural, inherent, or inalienable,

and exist independently of government. Thomas Jefferson called theseinalienable

rights: "...rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limitsdrawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the

law', because law is often but the tyrants will, and always so when it violates the

rights of the individual."[25]For classical liberalism, rights are of anegativenature

rights that require that other individuals (and governments) refrain from interfering

with individual liberty, whereas social liberalism (also called modern

liberalismor welfare liberalism) holds that individuals have a right to be provided with

certain benefits or services by others.[26]Unlike social liberals, classical liberals are

"hostile to the welfare state."[11]They do not have an interest in material equality but

only in "equality before the law."[27]Classical liberalism is critical of social liberalism

and takes offense atgroup rights being pursued at the expense of individual rights.

DEMOCRACY

Democracy is a political government either carried out by the people (direct

democracy), or the power to govern is granted to elected representatives

(Representative democracy).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_Enlightenmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_Enlightenmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundationalismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_Right_of_Kingshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_religionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lockehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Property_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_libertieshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equality_under_the_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited_governmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_marketshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereignty_of_the_individualhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_propertyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_democracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inalienable_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inalienable_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inalienable_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inalienable_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism#cite_note-24http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism#cite_note-24http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism#cite_note-24http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_and_positive_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_and_positive_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_and_positive_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_liberalismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism#cite_note-Kelley-25http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism#cite_note-Kelley-25http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism#cite_note-Kelley-25http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_statehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism#cite_note-Ryan-10http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism#cite_note-Ryan-10http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism#cite_note-Ryan-10http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Material_equalityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equality_before_the_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism#cite_note-26http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism#cite_note-26http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism#cite_note-26http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individual_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representative_democracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representative_democracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individual_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism#cite_note-26http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equality_before_the_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Material_equalityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism#cite_note-Ryan-10http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_statehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism#cite_note-Kelley-25http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_liberalismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_and_positive_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism#cite_note-24http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inalienable_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inalienable_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_democracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_propertyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereignty_of_the_individualhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_marketshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited_governmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equality_under_the_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_libertieshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Property_rightshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lockehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_religionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_Right_of_Kingshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundationalismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_Enlightenmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_Enlightenment

8/4/2019 Pol sci (1)

20/21

Majority rule is a decision rule that selects one of two alternatives, based on which

has more than half the votes. It is the binary decision rule used most often in

influential decision-making bodies, including the legislatures of democratic nations.

Some scholars have recommended against the use of majority rule, at least under

certain circumstances, due to an ostensible trade-off between the benefits of majority

rule and other values important to a democratic society. Most famously, it has been

argued that majority rule might lead to a "tyranny of the majority", and the use of

supermajoritarian rules and constitutional limits on government power have been

recommended to mitigate these effects. Recently some voting theorists have argued

that majority rule may actually be the best rule to protect minorities.

Participatory democracy, with subtype direct democracy, is a process emphasizing

the broad participation of constituents in the direction and operation of political

systems. Etymological roots of democracy (Greekdemosandkratos) imply that the

people are in power and thus that all democracies are participatory. However,

traditionalrepresentative democracy tends to limit citizen participation to voting,

leaving actual governance to politicians.[citation needed]

Participatory democracy strives to create opportunities for all members of a political

group to make meaningful contributions to decision-making, and seeks to broaden

the range of people who have access to such opportunities. Because so much

information must be gathered for the overall decision-making process to succeed,

technology may provide important forces leading to the type

of empowerment needed for participatory models, especially those technological

tools that enable community narratives and correspond to the accretion of

knowledge. Effectively increasing the scale of participation, and translating small but

effective participation groups into small world networks, are areas currently being

studied.

Aggregative democracyuses democratic processes to solicit citizens preferences and then

aggregate them together to determine what social policies society should adopt. Therefore,

proponents of this view hold that democratic participation should primarily focus onvoting, where

the policy with the most votes gets implemented. There are different variants of this:

Under minimalism, democracy is a system of government in which citizens give teams of

political leaders the right to rule in periodic elections. According to this minimalist conception,

citizens cannot and should not rule because, for example, on most issues, most of the time,

they have no clear views or their views are not well-founded.Joseph Schumpeterarticulated

this view most famously in his book Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy.[65]

Contemporary

proponents of minimalism includeWilliam H. Riker,Adam Przeworski,Richard Posner.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majorityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_democracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Participation_(decision_making)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demoshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demoshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demoshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kratoshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kratoshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kratoshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representative_democracyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Votinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governancehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politicianhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_neededhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_neededhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_