The task of this course is to introduce the task of thinking philosophically about political things. In Plato's Apology, Socrates famously observes, "The unexamined life is not worth living." That will be the motto for this course. We will examine the basic beliefs that contemporary society holds about politics. By this we do not simply mean politics as it is empirically (that is, as a matter of fact), but politics as it is normatively (that is, as a matter of values or ethics) as well. Our aim is to be critical: we wish to see how the conventional wisdom or our time—ideas like "We hold these truths to be self evident . . . ," "One nation, under God, with liberty and justice for all," "Government of the people, by the people, and for the people"—reflects not the truth about politics but merely the prejudices of our particular society. We wish to see where our own ideas about politics are wrong. In the process, we will also see where they are right.

This means challenging every received idea that you hold about politics. Virtually all of these ideas are rooted in classical liberalism, the dominant political theory of the past three centuries of Western civilization. You don't need to be taught liberalism: you live it every day and know it as simply the way the world is. Political debate, especially since the collapse of the Soviet Union, takes place within the basic principles of liberal political thought: the primacy of the individual, the equality and freedom of all people, government by consent, rule of law. Contemporary "conservatives," "moderates," and "liberals" merely debate different interpretations of these fundamental principles. Liberalism is what the Italian philosopher Antonio Gramsci called a hegemonic ideology: a set of ideas in relation to which all political activity of an age is defined. Even if you are not a liberal in this philosophical sense, your political ideas are shaped as a response to liberalism.

The task of political philosophy is to unmask this, to show that the world is built by liberalism and not that liberalism is built by the world. We seek not necessarily to show that liberalism is wrong, but to critically examine politics by asking where liberalism might be wrong. In ancient Athens, Socrates did this by going around asking questions, trying to rouse the Athenians from their sleep and encourage them to care for truth and virtue; he was the gadfly of Athenian politics. We will do this by exploring a series of important texts in the history of political thought, using them as Socratic gadflies. These readings and our discussions will challenge the hegemony of liberalism just as Socrates challenged the prevailing ideas of his time, leading us not to reject liberalism but to question it. We will, in this course, live the examined life. We will learn to be political philosophers.

Course Policies
Students are responsible for complying with all course policies. General course policies are described in the "General Course Policies" document. Policies specific to this course are described below. All policies and schedules are provisional, and are subject to addition, deletion, change, or waiver with or without notice when, in the sole judgment of the instructor, doing so would further the educational goals of the course. Where these policies conflict with university regulations, those regulations prevail.

REGISTRATION FOR THIS COURSE CONSTITUTES YOUR
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF AND CONSENT TO THESE POLICIES.

Course Objectives
In addition to the objectives stated in general course policies, students who successfully complete this course will have achieved the following.

1. Students will understand the nature of philosophical inquiry into political questions.

2. Students will be able to make effective critical evaluations of moral issues in contemporary politics.

Assignments and Evaluation
This course requires much work. Philosophy requires much reading, more discussion, and above all writing. All of this will contribute to your grade. The course will require five papers of varying length. Details of each assignment are available on the course schedule page.

1. Introductory Essay. In an essay of approximately 750-1,000 words, respond to the statement provided in class in the spirit of Plato's Apology and Mill's On Liberty. It is due at the beginning of class on February 1. This is worth 10% of your course grade.

2. Interpretive Essay. Write an essay of approximately 1,250 to 1,500 words interpreting Federalist Papers Nos. 10 and 51. The final essay is due at the beginning of class on February 15. This is worth 20% of your grade.

3. Application Essay. Write an essay of approximately 1,250 to 1,500 words applying the ideas of Aristotle, Beauvoir, Foucault, or Gramsci to contemporary society. There will be an open discussion of issues related to the essay on March 6; you should have a draft completed by then. The final essay is due at the beginning of class on March 8. This is worth 20% of your grade.

4. Critical Essay. Write an essay of approximately 1,250 to 1,500 words critically examining one of the arguments about democracy that we have studied. There will be an open discussion of issues related to the essay on April 10; you should have a draft completed by then. The final essay is due at the beginning of class on April 12. This is worth 20% of your grade.

5. Final Essay. In an essay of approximately 1,500 to 2,000 words, interpret, apply, and critique the reading assigned in class. It is due at the scheduled meeting for the final exam (Tuesday, May 1 at 1:00 PM). This is worth 30% of your course grade.

Standards for the timely completion and evaluation of all assignments are included in the general course policies. Grades will be assigned using the following scale: A (90% - 100%); B (80% - 89.9%); C (70% - 79.9%); D (60% - 69.9%); F (below 60%).

Readings
All readings are available online. A password is required to access some online readings. It is available only in person from the instructor and will be announced in class. All readings are required.

Workload
According to the accreditation standards that validate your degree as a legitimate one, to receive three semester credit hours requires 135 hours of study, including not more than 45 hours in class. In this course, study hours are budgeted as follows:

Outside commitments will not excuse students whose performance suffers because they cannot meet these requirements. Students should take a course load that is consistent with their overall level of time commitments.

Course Schedule

Part I: Thinking Philosophically about Politics
January 9: Introduction. No readings.
January 11: The Philosophical. Isaiah Berlin, "Does Political Theory Still Exist?," sec. I-VI
January 16: How to Philosophize. Berlin, sec. V-IX.
January 18: Asking Questions. Plato, Apology, first speech and dialogue with Meletus; Crosstalk: Does Christmas Music Suck? (an example of dialectical reasoning).
January 23: Philosophy's Value. Plato (continued).
January 25: Free Inquiry--What We Get. John Stuart Mill, On Liberty, ch. 2, para. 1-20
January 30: Free Inquiry--What We Owe. Mill, para. 21-44.
February 1: Introductory Essay Due. In an essay of approximately 750-1,000 words, respond to the following statement in the spirit of Plato's Apology and Mill's On Liberty. "You have no clue what the Pledge of Allegiance means. It is merely a mantra, recited ritualistically by schoolchildren to brainwash them into loyalty to the state. And if you thought about what it meant you would recognize that it is a lie, and that you would never pledge allegiance to a state perpetuated by such a lie."

Part II: Reading and Interpreting Philosophical Texts
February 6: A Text. Federalists 10 and 51.
February 8: Madison as an Elitist. Charles Beard, An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution.
February 13: Madison as a Pluralist. Robert Dahl, A Preface to Democratic Theory.
February 15: Interpretive Essay Due. Write an essay of approximately 1,250 to 1,500 words interpreting Federalist Papers Nos. 10 and 51. Present Madison's general view of how the Constitution of 1787 functions, and decide whether Madison is better understood as a pluralist or an elitist.

Part III: Liberalism's Assumptions
February 20: Human Nature as Political. Aristotle, The Politics Bk. I, Parts I, II.
February 22: No class (instructor illness).
February 27: Identity as Constructed. Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex, "Introduction."
March 1: Power as Structural. Michel Foucault, Discipline and Punish, "Panopticism."
March 6: Application Essay Discussion. Bring a draft of your essay.
March 8: Application Essay Due. Write an essay of approximately 1,250 to 1,500 words applying the ideas of Aristotle, Beauvoir, or Foucault to contemporary society. Explain the theorist's ideas. The pick some aspect of contemporary political life, and consider questions such as the following: What would that theorist say about it? How does the theorist help us better understand it?

Note: You should NOT decide whether the theorist is right or wrong, only how the theorist's ideas engage contemporary politics. To answer this question, you MUST do three things, and these tasks should guide the structure of your paper:

• Explain the basic philosophical principles of the theorist in question.

• Describe in some detail a political practice, process, or structure in contemporary politics.

• Explain, interpret, or evaluate the aspect of politics in question using the principles of the theorist in question.

Use the cover page. Copy the text and paste it into your word processor, replacing the title and name lines with your name and your paper's title. Do not fill in any other lines. Use the standards to guide your paper, keeping in mind that the percentages indicated are rough indications of relative weight and will not be applied with mathematical precision.

Part IV: How Does Democracy Function?
March 13: Agonistic Democracy. Thyucidides, "Pericles' Funeral Oration."
March 15: SWPSA Conference (no class).

March 20, 22: Spring Break (no class).

March 27: Deliberative Democracy. John Dewey, The Public and its Problems.
March 29: The Impracticality of Democracy. William Riker, Liberalism Against Populism.
April 3: The Impossibility of Democracy. Gaetano Mosca, The Ruling Class; Robert Michaels, Political Parties (1 file).
April 5: The Undesirability of Democracy. Jose Ortega y Gasset, The Revolt of the Masses, chs. I, V, VI, XI, XV.
April 10: Critical Essay Discussion. Bring a draft of your essay.

April 12: Critical Essay Due. Write an essay of approximately 1,250 to 1,500 words critically examining one of the arguments about democracy that we have studied. In completing your essay, you must accomplish the following tasks:

• Interpretation. Begin by explaining the principles of the theorist that you are criticizing. Refer back to the ideas that we learned during our study of interpretation, and use these ideas to tell me what the theorist is about. Do not simply list the topics that the theorist talks about; render the ideas into a coherent argument.

• Evaluation. Consider questions such as the following: Where is the theory right and wrong? To what extent is it logically coherent? What does it assume, and are those assumptions sound?

• Implications. How do the theory's arguments and your criticism of them affect political practice?

You must use a minimum of five citations to specific passages in the theoretical text; these need not be direct quotations. Refer to paragraph numbers, not page numbers, for web-based texts.

Use the cover page. Copy the text and paste it into your word processor, replacing the title and name lines with your name and your paper's title. Do not fill in any other lines. Use the standards to guide your paper, keeping in mind that the percentages indicated are rough indications of relative weight and will not be applied with mathematical precision.

Note: The Critical Essay is part of the program assessment process. Students majoring in political science must submit two copies of the paper; one will be kept as part of your assessment portfolio. A completed portfolio is a graduation requirement.

The paper will be assessed as follows with regard to program performance (these standards will not govern your grade specifically but should be followed because they are standards for a good paper):

1. Introduction - a clear and explicit statement of the reading's thesis and a summary of the argument of the reading.

2. Interpretation - a summary of the main points of the assigned reading, including (a) a description of the theoretical problem in question, (b) an identification of the reading's overall thesis, and (c) a description of the main arguments used to support that thesis.

3. Evaluation - a critical examination of the strengths and weaknesses of the reading, especially with regard to (a) the validity (logical relationship between premises and conclusion) and soundness (truth of the premises used) of the argument, (b) the adequacy of its interpretation of major figures in political thought, and (c) the degree to which it provides insight into the issue in question.

4. Application - a critically examined use of the reading as evaluated above to normatively explain or evaluate some practice in contemporary politics.

Part V: Systematic Philosophy.
April 17-26: Confucius, The Analects of Confucius, books 1-8, 10, 12-14.

May 1 (1:00 PM, Atlanta Bread Company): Final Essay Due. Please join your classmates for lunch and discussion of the final paper.

In an essay of approximately 1,500 to 2,000 words, interpret, apply, and critique Mark E. Warren, "What Can Democratic Participation Mean Today?," Political Theory, Vol. 30, No. 5. (Oct., 2002), pp. 677-701. To download the article, click on the "download" link at the top of the first page of the article. To access this link from off campus you may first need to log into JSTOR through the off-campus databases link on the library web site.

In completing your essay, you must accomplish the following tasks:

• Interpretation. Begin by explaining Warren's argument. Refer back to the ideas that we learned during our study of interpretation, and use these ideas to tell me what Warren is about. Do not simply list the topics that Warren talks about; render the ideas into a coherent argument. In addition, specifically answer one of the following interpretive questions.

1. How is Warren's understanding of democracy different from either of the two models of democracy that Riker analyzes?

2. Can Warren's eight guidelines be seen as creating a version of Confucian li for democratic citizens?

• Evaluation. Consider questions such as the following: Where is Warren right and wrong? To what extent is his argument logically coherent? What does it assume, and are those assumptions sound? In addition, specifically answer one of the following questions.

1. Do Warren's arguments regarding diminished political expectations adequately defend democracy against the critiques of Mosca and Michels? (Do not answer this question if you answer interpretive question 1 above)

2. Does Warren's assessment of the landscape of democracy work is power functions in a disciplinary power, as Foucault suggests?

3. Are Warren's "critical citizens" being critical in the kinds of ways of which Plato would approve?

• Application. Identify applications of at least two of Warren's eight guidelines for participatory democracy to contemporary political practices in the United States. Evaluate these critiques, i.e., show why the political environment is either better or worse if the guideline was implemented. Do not use examples that Warren himself uses.

You must use a minimum of five citations to specific passages in the theoretical text; these need not be direct quotations. Refer to paragraph numbers, not page numbers, for web-based texts.

Use the cover page. Copy the text and paste it into your word processor, replacing the title and name lines with your name and your paper's title. Do not fill in any other lines. Use the standards to guide your paper, keeping in mind that the percentages indicated are rough indications of relative weight and will not be applied with mathematical precision.

Papers are due at the scheduled time of the final exam. Papers submitted other than at the final exam meeting must be received before noon to be considered on time. No credit will be given for a paper submitted after noon on Friday, May 4.