Northern Illinois University
Department of Political Science
Political Science 651 Fall
2009
Seminar in Modern Professor Glenn
Political Philosophy: Burke Office Hours:
6:30-9:10 PM MTW 11:00-11:50
DU 466 &
by appointment
gglenn@niu.edu 753-1091
This seminar will study the
speeches and writings of Edmund Burke with a view to the tradition of political
philosophy. The readings will be from the edition by Ross J. S. Hoffman and Paul
Levack Burke's Politics: Selected Writings and
Speeches of Edmund Burke on Reform, Revolution, and War. The professor has
also identified some secondary readings that he has found useful. A list of
these readings is appended to this syllabus. They are not required reading for
the seminar and will not be discussed in class. However, some of them deal with
the suggested paper topics and some will be useful for the final exam. They are
available in the Library Reserve Room. I would recommend that you make a copy
and read them by way of broadening and deepening your understanding of Burke.
Alternately, if you would like a copy of all of them I can have them printed
and bound. They will cost you only what they cost me. If you want a bound copy,
please let me know within the first week of the semester.
CLASS SCHEDULE
DATE READING
(Page numbers are from Hoffman and Levack)
8/25 Introduction: What is
the purpose of studying political philosophy? Why should students of political
philosophy study Burke? To what seemingly permanent problems
of political philosophy is Burke particularly relevant? Who else,
besides students of political philosophy, might benefit from studying Burke and
for what ends? Problems in Burke=s thought.
9/1 The
American Problem. Observations on `The Present State of the Nation' (1769) pp.
46-55.
9/8 Observations
(Cont.) Speech on American Taxation(1774), pp. 55-61.
9/15 Speech
on Conciliation with America (1775), pp. 61-93.
9/22 THE
FRENCH REVOLUTION
Reflections on the Revolution
in France (1789), pp. 277-391 (These
pages will be covered over 5 classes.)
9/29 Research
paper topic to be agreed upon in writing by today.
9/29 Reflections continued.
10/6 Reflections
continued
10/13 Reflections continued
10/20 Reflections
continued.
10/27 Reflections
continued.
11/3 BURKE'S LATER WRITINGS ON THE FRENCH
REVOLUTION
Appeal from the New to the Old
Whigs (1791), pp. 390-400.
Thoughts on French Affairs (1791), 401-424
11/10 Letters on a Regicide Peace (1794-96), pp. 457-73.
THE CATHOLIC AND IRISH QUESTIONS,
pp. 113-29.
11/17 continued, pp. 474-511.
11/17 Research papers due
today.
11/24 BURKE=S
DEFENSE OF HIS LIFE
Letter to a Noble Lord (1795), pp. 512-536.
12/1 Wrap up. Take
home-final exam questions handed out today.
12/8 Scheduled Final exam
time. Take home final exam due in class today.
Note: The scheduled exam time is
6:00pm rather than 6:30. We can decide whether 6 or 6:30 is more convenient for
us.
DAY-TO-DAY EXPECTATION OF STUDENTS
1. Attend each class.
2. Prepare for class by doing the readings
to be discussed that day.
3. Bring the appropriate readings to
class, and be prepared to ask and answer thoughtfully questions about them.
CLASS PARTICIPATION
Good quality class participation is
expected and is a substantial part of the final grade. "Good quality"
does not mean talking frequently. It means
1) regular
evidence of studying the readings;
2) the ability to
reflect and comment intelligently on the issues raised in the readings and
lectures;
3) asking apt
questions that aim to make sense of the readings;
4) showing
evidence of making progress in fitting together the pieces of Burke=s thought, or the professor=s interpretation,into
a coherent whole.
WRITTEN REQUIREMENTS
1. A research paper
of 1500-3000 words is due Tuesday November 17. The paper topic is to be agreed
upon between the professor and student no later than Tuesday September 29.
Please submit the proposed topic in writing. In general, I recommend that you
select a topic which seems to you important as well as interesting. The paper
is to be primarily your own grappling with Burke=s text and only very
secondarily about any relevant scholarship. Additional guidelines and
expectations concerning the papers, including some possible paper topics,is attached to this
syllabus.
2. Each student will make
an 10 minute oral presentation to the class explaining
their research topic. The student should schedule the date with the instructor
for after September 29. The purpose is to enable you to benefit from explaining
your topic to your fellow students, why you think it both important and
interesting, and perhaps gaining some useful questions and perspectives from
them.
3. There will be a take
home final examination. The questions will be handed out Tuesday December 1
and the essays will be due at the scheduled final exam time Tuesday December 8 at 6:00 pm. Since
we are required to meet at the exam time, I will be prepared to discuss matters
related to the course with you at that time but there will be no required
reading for that day. This class is intended as an opportunity for a more
unstructured discussion that is ordinarily the case.
GRADING
An A
grade in the class requires daily evidence of having read and thought about
that days readings; raising questions about what the text seems to mean or whether
what it seems to mean makes sense, either in itself or in relation to the
text's apparent meaning elsewhere.
An A
grade in the class also requires that you be able to answer, both thoughtfully
and to the point, questions put by the professor. Comments not germane to the
topic under discussion are discouraged.
A
grade of A in the class also requires the paper to be written with clarity,
economy, and focus.
A grade of A in the class also require that both the paper and
the final take-home examination show understanding of the material beyond the
obvious. Showing how the text sheds
light on contemporary issues might be important but should not get in the way
of first understanding the text in the manner intended by Burke.
Course
grades are based first on the quality of oral participation in the seminar and
second on the two written assignments.
INCOMPLETES
Except as indicated above, incomplete=s are given only for
unforeseeable events which make impossible completion of the course work by the
end of the semester. Students are responsible for informing the professor of such events,
and for securing his consent to an incomplete, as promptly as possible.
Receiving an incomplete should not be taken for granted and will not be given
for insufficient reasons, e.g. "I want to do the best possible job on the
paper."
POSSIBLE
PAPER TOPICS
And additional
guidelines and expectations
Directions: The following are possible
paper topics but you are free to formulate your own. Whether you do so or use
one of the topics below, your topic should be approved no later than September
29. Only one person may work on each of the following topics and the principal
is "first come, first served." The paper is due Tuesday November 17. Verbum sapienti sat.
Directions: The paper should interpret and make
intelligent observations about some aspect of Burke's teaching or about some
controversy in Burke scholarship. The intention is to see how well you can
understand and propose solutions to problems of interpretation on the basis of
the text. The paper must be a minimum of 1500 words and a maximum of 3000
words. Please include a word count. Papers without a word count, or which
exceed the maximum word count, will be returned unread.
1. "Political philosophy by its very
nature casts a shadow on all existing regimes by demonstrating their
deficiencies as illumined by the theoretically best regime." (Steven Lenzner, "Strauss's Three
Burke's: The Problem of Edmund Burke in Natural Right and History, Political
Theory, August 1991 p. 370.) Does Burke have a teaching about what
regime is theoretically best? If he does, what is the relation of that regime
to the British Constitution? If he does not, what does that say about the
status of his teaching as political philosophy and his status as a political
philosopher?
2. Burke defends a particular tradition,
the British constitutional tradition, with reasoned arguments. But one might
construe doing so as already having, in some manner, abandoned tradition. For
example: "to engage in argument is already to contribute to the death
of...tradition" (Don Herzog, "Puzzling Through Burke", Political
Theory August 1991, p. 361.) Is this true? If not, from what perspective
does the assertion of such a radical incompatibility between reason and
tradition come? Can there be a sense in which arguments (or reasons) embedded
in tradition can be restated to defend, not merely the `traditionness= of a tradition, but also its rationality?
3. One commentator distinguishes thusly
between "political philosophy" and "political thought in
general." "Political thought may not be more,...than
the expounding of defense of a firmly held conviction or of an invigorating myth;
but it is essential to political philosophy to be set in motion, and be kept in
motion, by the disquieting awareness of the fundamental difference between
conviction, or belief, and knowledge. A political thinker who is not a
philosopher is primarily interested in, or attached to, a specific order or
policy; a political philosopher is primarily interested in or attached to the
truth." (Leo Strauss, "What Is Political Philosophy" 1959. From
the point of view of this distinction, can one still argue that Burke's thought
is, or elements of it are, political philosophy? This essay is published in several
places. One is Strauss' book of the same title. More recently it is in Hilail Gilden ed., Political
Philosophy. I also have copies
available. In all the versions, the passage is about 4 pages from the
beginning.)
4. How can one reconcile
Burke's talk of "the eternal and immutable rules of morality" (Hastings
Trial, 7 May 1789 in Works [Little, Brown edition] vol. X, p. 408)
with the apparently contradictory statement "Nothing universal can be
rationally affirmed on any moral, or any political subject." (Appeal from the New to the Old Whigs, 1791, Works
IV, p. 80)? And if these statements cannot be reconciled, how does that effect the soundness, coherence or truthfulness of Burke=s thought?
5. It is sometimes argued
that one of the features of modern thought is that its principles tend towards
self destruction-and nihilism-as one tries to render them consistent. This might
mean that such thought can be preserved only if one refrains from too great an
insistence on consistency. A striking feature of Burke's thought is his
characteristically critical remarks on "theory" although it is unclear whether
everything called `theory= is simply rejected or
whether `theory= is preserved in some
form or some manner. Could it be that Burke did not present a treatise on
political philosophy, after the manner say of Hobbes, because he somehow
understood the tendency identified in the first paragraph and sought to avoid
it?
6. Burke has been accused
of many inconsistencies both of thought and of action. Here are some of them.
1) A willingness to decrease the franchise but to expand it to Dissenters and
Catholics (Hoffman and Levack, p. xxiii). 2) A
supporter of the American revolution and opponent of the French revolution
(Peter J. Stanlis ed., Edmund Burke, Selected
Writings and Speeches pp. 19-20. 3) A defender of a sensist
epistemology (in his essay on the Sublime and the Beautiful) which is
said to be incompatible with his adherence to natural law. 4) Whether his
thought ultimately appeals to justice or to expediency (Charles Parkin, The Moral Basis of Burke's Political Thought
p. 10 citing C.E. Vaughn, Studies in the History of Political Philosophy
Before and After Rousseau, 2
Vols. Vol. II, p. 59.) Take one of these alleged inconsistencies and try to
figure out whether they are really such or whether they can somehow be
reconciled.
7. Two hundred years
before contemporary "political correctness", Burke devoted eight
years of struggle in Parliament to an attempt to protect the people of India
against the depredations of the British East India Company. The importance
Burke placed on this effort is shown by two facts. 1) Four of the twelve
volumes of Burke's collected Works consist entirely of speeches and
writings concerning this matter. 2) Near the end of his life, Burke said that
he regarded his attempt to help India his life's most important work.
Many
of Burke's friends were puzzled about this enormous expenditure of effort in a
cause that was certain to lose and which would gain him no other apparent
political advantage. One of those friend, Miss Mary
Palmer, wrote to him from Calcutta asking why he was doing this, especially
since his party was not united about the issue. Burke responded: "I have
no party in this Business, my dear Miss Palmer, but among a set of people, who
have none of your Lillies and Roses in their faces;
but who are the images of the great Pattern as well as you and I. I know what I
am doing; whether the white people like it or not." (Holden
Furber ed., The Correspondence of Edmund Burke
Vol. 5 [Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1965] p. 255).
Today,
a sensitivity to oppression of dark skinned people by
whites, stemming from a commitment to equality, would lead some to defend
people situated like the Indians. However, Burke was no egalitarian. What,
then, in his thought accounts for his sensitivity to their oppression and for
his willingness to expend himself in their behalf, not only at enormous length
but even against the advice of "white people"?
8. Contemporary reformers
frequently appear indifferent to whether political change grows in any way out
of present or past arrangements. On the contrary, change seems to be understood
as essentially a rejection of those arrangements. In contrast, Burke seem to
think that it is important that reform of a people's way of life, especially
their political way of life, must take its bearings from, and build upon, their
past. Why does he think so? (A place to start is Michael Mosher, "The Skeptic's
Burke" Political Theory August 1991 p. 400 ff.) How does
this emphasis on reforming on the basis of the received tradition, consist with
his view that "Prudence in new cases can offer nothing on grounds of
retrospect" (Thoughts on French Affairs 1791, in Hoffman and Levack, p. 415).
9. What are the grounds
for Burke's defense of religious toleration (or is it religious freedom?) for
Irish Catholics? The relevant texts are
primarily Tract on the Popery Laws [1765]), Letter to a Peer of
Ireland on the Penal Laws against Irish Catholics [1782], Letter to Sir
Hercules Langrishe [1792]), A Letter to
Richard Burke on the Protestant Ascendancy in Ireland [1793], A Letter
to William Smith on the Subject of Catholic Emancipation [January 29,
1795], and a Second Letter to Sir Hercules Langrishe
[May 26, 1795].
Are these in any way different from the grounds for his defense of religious
toleration for Protestant Dissenters? The relevant texts are Speech on the
Acts of Uniformity (1772), Speech on the Relief of Protestant Dissenters
(1773), and Speech on the Petition of the Unitarian Society (1792).
10. How can one account
for the fact that Burke, who is allegedly not only a conservative but the
founder of conservatism, is so concerned about freedom and justice for
minorities of various descriptions (the Americans, English Protestant dissenters,
Irish Catholics, the East Indians, and African slaves)? If conservatism is
supposed to be somehow s defense of "tradition", why is Burke such a
reformer respecting the traditional treatment of these minorities?
11. Explain and respond
to the following: "Burke is widely respected as a conservative who was
intelligent enough to provide solid philosophical foundations for his
conservatism. It is perfectly true that
many of his observations upon society have a conservative basis; but if one
studies the kind of argument which Burke regularly employed when at grips with
concrete policies, one discovers a strong addiction to the argument from
circumstance. Now for reasons which will
be set forth in detail later, the argument from circumstance is the argument
philosophically appropriate to the liberal.
Indeed one can go much further and say that it is the argument fatal to
conservatism". (Richard Weaver, "Edmund Burke and
the Argument from Circumstance" in The Ethics of Rhetoric [Chicago:
Regnery, 1953], p. 58). One will learn a great
deal about rhetoric from studying Weaver's essay.
12. As a followup to Weaver=s thesis in the previous topic, a contemporary
scholar Nancy Rosemblum in Liberalism and the
Moral Life argues that Burke should be included in the liberal tradition.
So does Jennifer Pitts in A Turn to Empire: The
Rise of Imperial Liberalism in Britain and France. These represents either
an attempt to expand `the liberal tradition= so as to include Burke; or else it might be a
return to the 19th century view of Burke interpreters like John
Morley who regarded him as liberal because of his defense of various groups who
were oppressed by, or in the name of, the British government. A paper laying out the evidence of Burke=s
`liberalism= could be valuable.