The Nature of Political Theory

8 The Nature of Political Theory

such as moral philosophy or philosophical anthropology. In fact, it is arguable that
moral philosophy became inextricably entwined with political philosophy in the work
of the Rawlsian generation of theorists.^3 Should we be concerned about this apparent
synonymity of the above terms? Some might have no worries at all, except possibly
with the concept ideology. Others might wish to separate out philosophy from the
rest or just dismiss dogmatically the whole question as just too intellectually uncom-
fortable. Again, political philosophy can be seen as narrower, political thought as too
broad and political ideology as too action-orientated, and thus all need to be kept
distinct. However, regardless of these various views, there is still a continuous overlap
and symbiosis of these terms in the European political vocabulary.
The compound term ‘political theory’, itself is of comparatively-recent vintage,
certainly in the manner that we now employ it. It is a product of the nineteenth and
twentieth centuries. In the nineteenth century, the word ‘theory’ often had pejorative
connotations, being seen as equivalent to ‘mere speculation’ or ‘untested facts’. This
is reflected in some of the senses indicated in the OED (namely, where a theory
can denote a ‘mere hypothesis or conjecture’). Despite this, the word ‘theory’ itself,
from its earliest use in European vocabularies, has been imbricated with ‘reflective
thought’ in general and philosophy in particular. Theory does clearly follow the
changing contours of philosophical traditions. In ancient Greek culture, theory was
characteristically associated with observation. Atheawas a spectacle; the one who
observed the spectacle was atheoros.Theoriameant beholding a spectacle. Theory was
thus envisaged as the intermediary between the event and the observer. It accounted
for the event or practice. Theory was not separate from event. Knowledge was, in
a sense, the unmediated event itself. In addition, theory was connected, from its
earliest inception, with philosophy and knowledge, by the view that philosophy was
a contemplative ‘seeing’ or ‘observing’. In Plato, for example,theoriaimplied (as
above) the observation of a spectacle. In Aristotle,theoriatook on a more obviously-
recognizable format of intellectual observation and contemplation in accordance
withsophia. The friend or lover (philia)ofwisdom(sophia) had the ability to see or
behold (theoria) through the eye of the mind.Theoriatherefore virtually became the
act of knowing itself. Althoughtheoriaappears detached, it still mediated between
the observer and the world. It was also regarded as the best ‘walk of life’. However the
more modern understanding of theory, particularly since the development of modern
natural science, is viewed as something we build and apply. It enables us, for example,
to link experiential data together, hypothesize and then instrumentally manipulate
the world. Greek classical theory, however, did not have such a problem (at least in its
own terms) with the world which theory observes or describes. In Aristotle, theory
was closely linked with events in the world. In more modern usage, though, theory is
seen to be disengaged from the world, and, certainly since the advent of Cartesianism,
is subject to self-doubt concerning its own status and its claims to knowledge. Theory
therefore needs confirmation and testing.^4
The association of theory with the contours of philosophical traditions has meant
that theory has been of necessity linked to the present day, to the changing fortunes
and character of philosophical thought. Whether the conceptions of philosophy be