since ‘methods’ simply makes my head ache, I might have to pull something together for this.
A call for papers for a workshop as part of the Tenth MANCEPT Annual Conference: 4th – 6th September 2013.
During the 1960s and 70s the methodological orthodoxy of enquiries into the study of political thought became the target of historical critique. Dissatisfied with analyses that masqueraded as historical theses, critics proposed alternative procedures they believed were more appropriate to interpretations of canonical texts. In reaction to the critique, political theorists turned inward, reflecting on the problem of how the canon should be reconstructed, thereby following in the footsteps of neighbouring disciplines such as philosophy and history, where hermeneutical issues had already been subjected to systematic investigation. Rather than trying to generate approaches distinctive to their enterprise, political theorists either ‘imported’ insights from the latter disciplines or expressed their aversion toward methodological debates.
This reluctance to talk about method has not changed much since. Indeed, some theorists consider methodological discussions as nothing but ‘continental’ charade. Aversion towards methodological debates is…
View original post 226 more words