Article Review Political Theory and Political Practice

Muktar Edris Burka

Political Theory and Political Practice
Author(s): GORDON GRAHAM
Source:Journal of Applied Philosophy, Vol. 16, No. 2 (1999), pp. 113-121
Published by: Wiley

1. ABSTRACT
What is the role of political theory in the real world of politics? This article reviews
contrasts the competing claims of intellectualism vs pragmatism in politics. It explores
the ends/means relation as one account of how ideas and actions might be connected and the
article have in article abstract that are similar idea within the paper

2. Summary of the article

In 1962 Isaiah Berlin published an essay entitled 'Does Political Theory Still
Exist?'. the question which forms its title was prompted in part by a remark in the
introduction to the first volume in the series that 'for the time being political
philosophy is dead'. Berlin considers one version of this claim; that political
theory might finally have given way to political science in something like the way
astrology, which to be replaced by astronomy. He was not here directly
concerned with the issue of political theory versus political science, but with a
closely related question: Is political theory normative? Berlin is clear as to why
the future of political theory was at that time thought to be uncertain.
A Theory of Justice seemed to overturn the contention that political philosophy
was dead. They could say, in fact, that it converted the paradoxically normative
character of traditional political theory into a platitude. Yet the existence or non-
existence of normative political philosophy and political theory is not quite the
same issue, because the normative political philosophy has been a topic within
political theory. So, even if we allow that political theory exists, we are left with
the question ‘Does it have any normative import?' which divided into two parts.
The first concerns the relation between a philosophical education and political
effectiveness, which here is at least no doubt on the first point and political theorists
have agreed on the ideas and
The second the way, if any, in which political theorizing feeds into political
practice which political theorists have differed widely like, Berkeley and others In
the article he was t o attempt adjudication between intellectualists and
pragmatists about politics, and back to Berlin on political theory. The political
theorist, philosopher or visionary formulates the ends of politics and the skilled
politician devises practicable means of bringing these about
How might this be shown? There seem to be two possible criteria of the
superiority of theoretically inspired ends-successful and they necessarily have
greater intrinsic merit. Success is a test of means. The successful politician is
one who achieves what he or she sets out to, and aim to remaining in power.
Consequently, successfulness cannot be a criterion by which we might distinguish

1
some kinds of ends from others. Of course, it is true that the chances of success in
any given Endeavour may be a function of the clarity or coherence of the end in
view, and that taking greater thought might enable us to secure these virtues in the
ends we pursue, but this applies directly to the aims of the pure pragmatist.

Not everything about the simple means/end model is mistaken, however, which is
why it has an initial plausibility. Some normative political theories can indeed be
construed as attempts to formulate generally validated aims in politics, and when
this is so the practical activities leading popular campaigns, seizing power by
force of arms or passing legislation. What distinguishes ends that are validated
in this way, we may suppose, is that they have a justification that self-interested or
partisan ends do not have and Justified
One possibility is rationality which is to arrive at truth and coherence. By this
reckoning, a course of action is justified if it rests upon an explanation which is
validly derived from a combination of indubitable first principles and true
propositions and he take it, is what Hobbes was aiming at.
Secondly, and more importantly for present purposes, even if we concede the
possibility of a perfectly rational political theory and complete rational
motivation on the part of those who subscribe to it, there seems to be a further
gap between rationality and

Political action, and hence political planning, is highly subject to contingency.

Suppose he accept that all my desires and choices are determined. Faced with the
dinner menu, he still have to make a choice, and nothing in my
deterministic beliefs will make it for me. To say that action is subject to
contingency can be to say no more than that the best laid plans can go astray.
well-formed intention may be a necessary condition for effective action.,

The argument which invokes the idea of a Markov chain is a powerful one, but
there is a danger that it is too powerful. Since any action which comprises a number
of stages could be construed in this way, the argument seems to imply a wholly
global scepticism about sustained and collective action which simply must be
unwarranted. One can imagine, for instance, the conduct of a war being analyzed
in this way, with the result that we can say, in advance, of any large scale military
action that it is likely not to succeed. But we know in fact that war can be chosen
as an instrument of policy and fought to good effect, and from this it surely
follows that there is something wrong with the Markov chain argument.

According to Berlin the reason political theory has not ceded, and is unlikely to
cede, to political science is that: Among the many topics that remain obstinately
philosophical, and have, despite repeated efforts, failed to transform themselves
into sciences are some that in their very essence involve value judgments ...

2
Among the problems which form the core of traditional political theory are those,
for instance, of the nature of equality, of rights, law, authority, rules
Equally plainly, however, we do not live in such a society, and the fact that we do
not is one which the political pragmatist, as a realist, must accommodate. It would
be as fatal to effective action to deny the competing variety of political values as to
become immersed in theoretical speculation alone. It follows that effective
political action requires deliberative communication between political agents
and, in the world we actually live in, this implies a normative and not merely a
technical language. There are three implications of this fact that are of some
importance here. First, such language cannot arise from nowhere; it cannot, that
is to say, be derived by pure reason from self evident first principles. Second, it
must provide and sustain reasons for action. Third, it must be capable of
generating a measure of consensus and it follows from these three features that
political deliberation relies upon beliefs and conceptions

For all that, both the common formulations and the general acceptance of these
same ideas, which together allow them to act as normative reasons for action and
deliberative full stops in political decision making, unquestionably owe something
to the writings of ‘uninterested theorists’. Conversely, the fact that slavery and the
divine right of kings are political non-starters in our world is in part attributable to
the reflections of philosophers and theologians upon them. To quote Berlin again:

3. Criticism
The article has accurate and clear idea which is very important which is used to
understand a the political theory and how it is important for the real world, that the
compare and contrast between intellectualist and pragmatic political ideas their
limitation, political theory and Practice. But, some ideas and the words in the
article are not easy to understand in short period of time which may consume the
time of person who needs to refer the article.

4. Conclusion
The intellectualist account of the relation between political theory and political
practice is certainly deeply mistaken. But though it is true that this means that
the pragmatists in politics need not trouble to take courses in political philosophy,
the pragmatic requirement to use the political vocabulary of the day means that
they cannot ignore the world of ideas around them, and hence cannot
altogether ignore the continuing contribution of political theorists to the
formation of that world. The article can be taken as reference for the students and
researcher those need on political theory and practice mainly to differentiate
intellectualist and pragmatic political ideas.
Reference
 Journal of Applied Philosophy, Vol. 16, No. 2 (1999), pp. 113-121
 https://www.aresearchguide.com/write-an-article-review.html