prepared to do to achieve it (assuming, of course, that we will want it when we see it). And for
theorists who prefer an analytic approach, this raises another question: whether a“just”society is
logically consistent or compatible with other political values like freedom or fairness.
But does this mean that the classical approach of justice-seeking is no longer of any value, or that
there is only one viable approach to posing and answering questions concerning justice, freedom,
fairness, and other political values? No, actually. Practitioners and teachers of political theory,
including those thinkers associated with theclassical normative traditionhave never totally confined
their inquiry to universal political truths transcending time and circumstances with a view to only
prescribing how human beings ought to live. For that matter,modernpolitical theorists have not
entirely limited their inquiry to describing what ends or purposes, in fact, guide social institutions and
public life. Nor havecontemporarythinkers confined themselves to pointing out conflicting values,
incongruities in the use of political concepts, or logical and empirical fallacies in canonical texts.^2
Nevertheless, many textbooks routinely (and often unquestioningly) treat the canonical works of
classical, modern, and contemporary political theory as historical traditions largely distinguished
by these distinct approaches to theorizing about politics.^3 How a particular theorist, or a political
theory, may subtly (or not so subtly) combine normative, empirical, and analytical inquiry is
overlooked or, at best, marginally considered. By way of illustrating this, I wish to offer an
alternative analytical framework for introducing students to canonical texts: one that examines
more carefully the differences betweenjustice-seeking(asking us to aspire to a standard of what we
ought to be),knowledge-seeking(requiring that we adjust our standards of justice to the empirical
and/or historical facts of human nature, institutions, and social conditions), and theanalytic or
critical critic approach(requiring our standards of justice be clearly expressed and thought out).
While it is important to note that these three approaches are somewhat arbitrary, each approach on
closer examination is distinct in the types of questions it allows the theorist to raise and what he or
she considers the purpose of theory. As“ideal types,”each of these approaches provides a lens
through which students may better appreciate what it is that the political theorist is trying to do.
These different approaches to theory may also suggest why we–as teachers of political thought–
do not necessarily agree on the purpose and uses of the Socratic method.
This need not, however, lead to the conclusion that political theorists (or teachers), based upon
the approach they seemingly prefer, can be slotted into boxes. As already noted, political thinkers
often without meaning to, seldom remain wedded to one approach. Any discussion of these
approaches will, undoubtedly, (and should) draw students’attention to crossovers. Put another way,
insofar as these three approaches correspond to Hume’s classic distinction between value, fact, and
reason, few thinkers avoid mixing (and sometimes confusing) them. My intention when using this
conceptual framework is not to reduce political theory to a few, fixed categories of inquiry or to
attach new labels to canonical thinkers, but instead consider how the complex interplay between
justice-seeking, knowledge-seeking, and critical analysis animates a Socratic dialog, broadly
conceived, and what some might call the vocation of political theory. Furthermore, if political
theory can be viewed as a search for standards, then each approach–justice-seeking, knowledge-
seeking, and critical analysis–may offer a distinctive contribution to what, for the theorist, is the
real or potential value of political inquiry. Before suggesting how this analytical framework may be
used as part of a Socratic method for engaging students in a contemporary classroom setting, let us
consider what each approach–justice-seeking, knowledge-seeking, and critical analysis–generally
contributes to the political theorist’s search for standards.
The Normative Approach: The Political Theorist as
Moralist and Justice-Seeker
Typically, when we think of political theory as a search for standards, it is the normative thinker or
“justice-seeker”who comes to mind and, especially,“the prototypical political theorist: Plato.”^4
The Socratic Method’s Search for Standards 153