| Summary, etc. |
WHEN a sizable new book has as its subject not some par ticular questions of political theory, some area, type, or aspect of it, but political theory itsclf; when, to some extent at lcast, it promises to supply and to teach this strange thing; whcn it boldly announces these intentions by presenting itself under the very title Political Theory (monumental, perhaps, but slightly challenging too); and when, surprisingly enough, this even scems to be the first full-size American book ever published under that title and the first of its kind to appear in any country-then a decent respect for the raised cyebrows of those who may pick it up requires that the author explain at the outset to what theory they are treated. Or is there only one political theory?<br/>If we use the term in its nonscientific sense there is, of course, no system of thought that could be called simply the political theory of the twentieth century, or of all times. We are then confronted, rather, with many highly diversified so-called theories, antagonisms among them running so deep that internal revolutions or revolts, external conflicts, and even global wars have resulted therefrom. None of these competing systems of thought, however, not even those dearest to us, are theories in the scientific sense of the word, or at least not entirely so. They all are based, in good measure, not on science but on other sources of human scheming, good or bad, such as religious revelation, intuitional conviction, world views held in common, national tradition, nationalistic or group ambitions in brief, on ways of thinking or feeling that do not claim scientific rank or, if they do, are not fully warranted in this pretense. |
