How to do Political Philosophy: Methods and Methodology

Over five days we will cover the following five topics, each via a two-hour live teaching session.

1. Arguing among ourselves 

What is political philosophy? How do we define it? And how does it differ from moral philosophy or political science? Is it best thought of, perhaps, in terms of institutions – meaning a focus on how government should work, or what an ideal state would be? Or in terms of concepts – meaning we try to work out what justice is, or what legitimacy requires?

At the end of this session, you will be able to critically compare rival accounts of our subject, and also understand the difference these accounts make for more ‘substantive’ arguments further down the line.

2. Arguing about ideas

This is the first of three sessions focussing on a core ‘task’ of political philosophy – analysis. Here we look at how what is typically called ‘conceptual analysis’ plays a key role in working out the nuts and bolts of our subject – the basic ideas out of which our grander arguments and visions are made.

At the end of this session, you will understand both the nature of conceptual analysis and its place within the wider subject, as a tool or method to be employed in pursuit of various ends.

3. Arguing against opponents

The second of three sessions focussing on a core ‘task’ of political philosophy – critique.

Here we look at the ways in which we criticise the arguments of others, why this might be important, why the choice of opponent matters, and also how this kind of argument ‘against’ begins to function as a kind of argument ‘for’. We also consider the fact that this form of argument is often combined with our previous task – ‘analysis’ – when putting together ‘literature reviews’, and also when laying the groundwork at the start of books and articles, where it is used to clear the space for the new ideas that follow.

At the end of this session, you will understand the different ways in which we criticise the positions of others in political philosophy, using leading examples from classic and contemporary debates, and also how to judge just what type of criticism, and how much criticism, is required in different settings, ranging from PhD chapters to long monographs.

4. Arguing for principles

In this final session, focussing on a core ‘task’ of political philosophy – ordering, you will learn to build on the work already done, via analysis and critique. You will put together your own normative cases, with a key focus on how to choose among, and then refine, particular principles. In this case, understood as general rules that tell us either what should or should not be the case in the world, or what we should or should not do within it.

These might be principles of justice, legitimacy, democracy, or something else altogether, but either way, they are the things we use to organise our own thinking and to guide our political preferences when it comes to concrete institutions and policies. The term ordering here thus has several meanings: Working out how to choose among rival principles; working out how to prioritise among different but compatible principles; and working out how those two things provide the basic shape of a possible political ‘order’.

At the end of this session, you will understand the importance of principles in political philosophy, the ways in which they can be developed and defended, and the ways in which they depend upon the earlier two tasks of analysis and critique.

5. Arguing with others

This final session focuses on bringing theory to practice, and guiding you on how to think about what might be called ‘public political philosophy’.

We think about the extent to which political philosophers can and should guide political practice, while reflecting carefully on various contemporary debates feeding into this issue, including: moralism / realism (Williams, Rossi & Sleat); ideal / nonideal theory (Simmons, Valentini), ‘political political’ theory (Waldron), comparative/transcendental theory (Sen), and more besides.

These debates facilitate difficult thinking about the extent to which we should be objective or impartial, and also about the extent to which we should offer detailed policy ‘blueprints’, as opposed to ‘abstract’ principles for others to interpret as they see fit. In addition, we reflect upon some of the wider ways in which philosophers can affect practice, from teaching, to advising, to public speaking, and so on.

At the end of this session, you will understand, not just the full range of tasks and techniques available to you as a scholar, but also the ways in which they might or might not be connected to the ‘real world’.

How the course will work online

There will be a two hour live teaching session held in Zoom, running each day from Monday to Friday. Each session will start with a 10-30 minute introduction from the instructor, after which we move back and forth between group discussion and a range of individual and group activities, all of which focus on how students can construct their own arguments.

You will need some familiarity with key debates in political theory, at least from introductory undergraduate / postgraduate courses, including those concerning, say, freedom, equality, justice, democracy, and so on.

You will also need to have read, and will need copies of: Is Political Philosophy Impossible? (Floyd, 2017) and What’s the Point of Political Philosophy? (Floyd, 2019).