Skip to main content

Research Repository

Advanced Search

What Might it Mean for Political Theory to Be More ‘Realistic’?

What Might it Mean for Political Theory to Be More ‘Realistic’? Thumbnail


Abstract

This paper explores two different versions of ‘the realist turn’ in recent political theory. It begins by setting out two principal realist criticisms of liberal moralism: that it is both descriptively and normatively inadequate. It then pursues the second criticism by arguing that there are two fundamentally different responses among realists to the alleged normative inadequacy of ideal theory. First, prescriptive realists argue that the aim of realism is to make political theory more normatively adequate by making it more realistic. Interpretative realists, on the other hand, argue that realist theorising should detach itself from such an aspiration, and instead aim at theoretical understanding rather than normative prescription. After some further elaboration of what interpretative realism might look like, it is acknowledged that both approaches still need to address the question of political normativity.

Acceptance Date Aug 1, 2016
Publication Date Jan 17, 2017
Publicly Available Date Mar 29, 2024
Journal Philosophia
Print ISSN 0048-3893
Publisher Springer Verlag
Pages 487-501
DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-016-9799-3
Keywords Ideal theory; Interpretative realism; Liberal moralism; Normativity; Prescriptive realism
Publisher URL https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11406-016-9799-3

Files




Downloadable Citations