"Political theory" and "political thought" redirect here. For the academic journal, seePolitical Theory (journal).
Political philosophy studies the theoretical and conceptual foundations ofpolitics. It examines the nature, scope, andlegitimacy of political institutions, such asstates. This field investigates differentforms of government, ranging fromdemocracy toauthoritarianism, and the values guiding political action, likejustice, equality, andliberty. As anormative field, political philosophy focuses on desirable norms and values, in contrast topolitical science, which emphasizesempirical description.
Political philosophers rely on variousmethods to justify and criticize knowledge claims. Particularists use a bottom-up approach and systematize individual judgments, whereas foundationalists employ a top-down approach and construct comprehensive systems from a small number of basic principles. One foundationalist approach uses theories abouthuman nature as the basis for political ideologies.Universalists assert that basic moral and political principles apply equally to every culture, a view rejected bycultural relativists.
Political philosophy is the branch ofphilosophy that studies the theoretical and conceptual foundations ofpolitics. It considers the relation between individual and society, the best organization of collective life, the distribution of goods andpower, the limits of state authority, and the values guiding political decisions. This field examines basic concepts such asstate,government,power,legitimacy,political obligation,justice, equality, andliberty, analyzing their essential features and how they influence citizens, communities, and policies.[1] Schools of political philosophy, such asliberalism,conservatism,socialism, andanarchism, offer diverse interpretations of these concepts. They are guided by different values and propose distinct frameworks for structuring societies.[2] As a systematic and critical inquiry, political philosophy scrutinizes established beliefs and explores alternative views.[3] A central motivation for this investigation is that forms of government are not predetermined facts of nature but human creations that can be actively shaped to the benefit or detriment of some or all.[4]
Political philosophers address various evaluative ornormative issues. They examine ideal forms of government and describe the values and norms that should guide political decisions.[5] They differ in this regard frompolitical scientists, who focus on empirical descriptions of how governments and other political institutions actually work rather than how they ideally should work.[6] The termpolitical theory is sometimes used as a synonym ofpolitical philosophy, but can also refer to a sister discipline. According to the latter view, political philosophy seeks to answer general and fundamental questions, whereas political theory analyzes and compares more specific aspects of political institutions while being more closely associated with the sciences.[7]
Political philosophy has its roots inethics—the area of philosophy studyingmoral phenomena—and is sometimes considered a branch of ethics.[a] While ethics examines right conduct and the good life in the broadest sense, political philosophy has a more narrow scope, focusing on the political domain.[9][b] Political philosophy is also closely related tosocial philosophy, and philosophical treatises often discuss the two together without clearly distinguishing between them. Despite their overlap, one difference is that social philosophy examines diverse kinds of social phenomena, while political philosophy has a more specific focus on power andgovernance.[10] Because of its interest in the role of laws and economic structures, political philosophy is also connected to thephilosophy of law andeconomics.[11]
The termpolitical philosophy originates in theancient Greek wordsΠολιτικά (politiká, meaning'affair of the state') andφιλοσοφία (philosophía, meaning'love of wisdom').[12] It is one of the oldest branches of philosophy and has been practiced in many different cultures.[13]
The state, a fundamental concept in political philosophy, is an organized political entity. States are associations of people, calledcitizens. They typically exercise control over a specificterritory, implement therule of law, and function asjuristic persons subject to rights and obligations whileengaging with other states. However, the precise definition of statehood is disputed. Some philosophical characterizations emphasize the state'smonopoly on violence and the subordination of the will of the many to the will of a dominant few. Another outlook sees the state as asocial contract for mutual benefit and security. States are characterized by their level of organization and the power they wield. They contrast withstateless societies, which are more loosely ordered social groups connected through a less centralized web of relationships.Nation, a related concept, refers to a group of people with a common identity such as shared culture, history, or language.Nation-states are states whose citizens share a commonnational identity that aligns with the state's political boundaries. Historically, the first states inantiquity werecity-states.[15]
Agovernment is an institution that exercises control and governs the people belonging to a political entity, usually a state. Some political philosophers see the government as an end in itself, while others consider it a means to other goods, such as peace and prosperity. Some governments set down fundamental principles, calledconstitution, that outline the structure, functions, and limitations of governmental authority, constraining the exercise of power.Anarchists reject governments and advocate self-governance without a centralized authority.[16]
Plato andAristotle discussed the advantages and disadvantages of different forms of government.[17]
Political philosophers distinguishforms of government based on who wields political power and how it is wielded. Indemocracies, the main power lies with the people. Indirect democracies, citizens vote directly on laws and policies, whereas inindirect democracies, they elect leaders who make these decisions. Democracies contrast withauthoritarian regimes, which reject political plurality and suppress dissent through centralized, hierarchical power structures. In the case ofautocracies, absolute power is vested in a single person, such as amonarch[c] or adictator. Foroligarchies, power is concentrated in the hands of a few, typically the wealthy. An authoritarian regime istotalitarian if it seeks extensive control over public and private life, such asfascism, which combines totalitarianism with nationalist andmilitarist political ideologies.[19]
Forms of government can also be distinguished based on the type of people making political decisions.Aristocracy implements rule by the elites, such as a privileged ruling class ornobility.[20] In the case ofmeritocracies, the ruling elites are chosen by skill rather than social background.[21] Fortechnocracies, people with technical skills, such as engineers and scientists, wield political power.[22]Theocracies prioritize religious authority in political decision-making, implement religious laws, and claim legitimacy by following thedivine will.[23] Political philosophers further discussfederalism andconfederalism,[d] which are systems of governance involving multiple levels: in addition to a central national government, there are several regional governments with distinct responsibilities and powers. These systems contrast withcolonialism,[e] where occupied territories are exploited rather than treated as equal partners, and withunitary states, where authority is centralized at the national level.[26]
A key aspect of governments and other political institutions is thepower they wield. Power is the ability to produce intended effects or control what people and institutions do. It can be based onconsent, like people following acharismatic leader, but can also take the form ofcoercion, such as a tyrannical ruler enforcing compliance through fear andrepression.[27] The powers of government typically include thelegislative power to establish new laws or revoke existing ones, theexecutive power to enforce laws, and thejudicial power to arbitrate legal disputes. Some governments follow theseparation of powers and have distinct branches for each function to prevent overconcentration andabuse of power. Others concentrate all power in a single entity.[28] Language is a central aspect of political power, serving as a medium ofcommunication and a force shaping public opinion. Linguistic power dynamics are reflected in the control of themeans of communication, such asmass media, and in thefreedom of speech of each individual.[29] Political power also includes institutional mechanisms that regulate the behavior of individuals, such as educational, disciplinary, and medical institutions.[30]
Legitimacy, another fundamental concept, is the rightful or justified use of power. Political philosophers examine whether, why, and under what conditions the powers exercised by a government are legitimate. Often-discussed requirements include that power is acquired following established rules and used for rightful ends.[31][f] For instance, the rules ofrepresentative democracies assert thatelections determine who acquires power as the legitimate ruler.Authority, a closely related concept, is the right to rule or the common belief that someone is legitimized to exercise power. In some cases, a person may have authority even if they lack the effective power to act. Some theorists also talk ofillegitimate authority in situations where the common belief in the legitimacy of a use of power is mistaken.[33]
Governments typically uselaws to wield power. Laws are rules of social conduct that describe how people and institutions may or may not act. According tonatural law theory, laws are or should be expressions of universalmoral principles inherent in human nature. This view contrasts withlegal positivism, which sees laws as humanconventions.[34]Political obligation is theduty of citizens to follow the laws of their political community. Political philosophers examine in what sense citizens are subject to political obligations even if they did not explicitly consent to them. Political obligation may or may not align with moral obligation—the duty to follow moral principles. For example, if anauthoritarian state imposes laws that violate basichuman rights, citizens may have a moral obligation todisobey.[35] Laws also regulate the rights of individuals as legal entitlements protecting their interests and freedom.[36]
Laws governingproperty are foundational to manylegal systems. Property is the right to control a good, such as the rights to use, consume, lend, sell, and destroy it. It covers both material goods, likenatural resources, and immaterial goods, such ascopyrights associated withintellectual property.Public property pertains to the state or community, whereasprivate property belongs to other entities, such as individual citizens. Many discussions in political philosophy address the advantages and disadvantages of private property.[37] For example,communism seeks to abolish most forms of private property in favor ofcollective ownership to promote economic equality.[38]
Diverse concepts in political philosophy act as values or goals of political processes.[40]Justice is a complex concept at the core of many political concerns. It is specifically associated with the idea that people should be treated fairly and receive what they deserve. More broadly, it also refers to appropriate behavior and moral conduct, but its exact meaning varies by context: it can be an aspect ofactions, avirtue of actors, or a structural feature of social situations. In the context of social life,social justice encompasses various aspects of fairness and equality in regard to wealth, assets, and other advantages. It includes the idea ofdistributive justice, which promotes an impartial allocation of resources, goods, and opportunities. In legal contexts,retributive justice deals withpunishment, with one principle being that the harm inflicted on an offender is proportional to theircrime.[41]
Justice is closely related to equality, the ideal that individuals should have the same rights, opportunities, or resources.Equality before the law is the principle that all individuals are subject to the same legal standards, rights, and obligations.Political equality concerns the ability to vote for someone and to become a candidate for a political position.Equal opportunity is the ideal that everyone should have the same chances in life, meaning that success should be based on merit rather than circumstances of birth or social class. This contrasts withequality of outcome, the idea that all people should have similar levels of material wealth andliving standards. Philosophers of politics examine and compare different conceptions of equality, discussing which of its aspects should guide political action. They also consider the influence ofdiscrimination, which refers to unfair treatment based on characteristics such asrace,gender,sexuality, andclass that can undermine equality. The school of political thought known asegalitarianism sees equality as one of the main goals of political action.[42]
Liberty orfreedom[g] is the ideal that people may act according to their will without oppressive restrictions. Political philosophers typically distinguish two complementary aspects of liberty:positive liberty—the power to act in a certain way—andnegative liberty—the absence of obstacles or interference from others. Liberty is a key value ofliberalism, a school of political philosophy.[44] Competing schools of thought debate whether laws necessarily limit liberty by restricting individual actions to protect the common good or enable it by creating a safe framework in which individuals can exercise their rights freely.[45] Liberty as an ability to do something is sometimes distinguished fromlicense, which involves explicitpermission to do something.[46]Autonomy, another closely related concept, is the ability to make informed decisions and govern oneself by being one's own master.[47]
Welfare,well-being, andhappiness express the generalquality of life of an individual and are central standards for evaluating policies and political institutions. Subjectivists understand these phenomena assubjective experiences, linked to the presence ofpleasant feelings, the absence of unpleasant ones, and a positive self-assessment of one's life. Objectivists, by contrast, argue that the relevant factors can be objectively measured, such as economic prosperity, health, education, and security.Welfarism is the school of political thought that states that well-being is the ultimate goal of political actions.[48]Welfare states are states that prioritize the social and economic well-being of their citizens through measures such as affordablehealthcare systems,social security, and free access to education for all.[49]
Pierre-Joseph Proudhon was a founding figure of anarchism and saw state authority as an obstacle to equality and liberty.[50]
Anarchism is a school of political thought[h] that rejects hierarchical systems, arguing for self-governing social structures and a stateless society, known asanarchy. Anarchists typically see liberty and equality as their guiding values. They understand authority over others as a threat to individual autonomy and criticize hierarchical structures for perpetuating power imbalances and inequalities. As a result, they challenge the legitimacy of centralized governments wielding coercive power over others.[i] Anarchism maintains that freedom from domination is central to human flourishing. It promotes social structures based on voluntary association to advance universal egalitarianism.[53]
Several schools of anarchism have been proposed.[54] Absolute ora priori anarchism rejects any form of state, arguing that state power is inherently illegitimate and unjust. Contingent ora posteriori anarchism presents a less radical view, suggesting that states are not inherently bad but nonetheless usually fail in practice. For example, consequentialist anarchism rejects states based on the claim that they typically have negative consequences, such as inequality, discrimination, and unhappiness.[51]Individualist anarchists emphasize the importance of individual freedom, seeking to defend it against any social structure that restricts personal autonomy, including parental authority and legal institutions. This outlook can take the form of libertarian anarchism oranarcho-capitalism.Collectivist or socialist anarchists, by contrast, stress the importance of community and voluntary cooperation within society, advocating collective ownership of resources and the means of production. For example,anarchist communism argues for decentralized social organization and communal sharing to promote well-being for all.[55]
Diverse criticisms of anarchism have been articulated. Some see anarchism as a negative attitude that seeks to destroy established institutions without providing viable alternatives, thereby simply replacing order with chaos. Another objection holds that anarchy is inherently unstable since hierarchical structures emerge naturally, meaning thatstateless societies will inevitably evolve back into some form of state. Further arguments assert that the guiding anarchist goal is based on an unreachable utopian ideal or that anarchism is incoherent since the attempt to undermine all forms of authority paradoxically is itself a new form of authority.[56]
Edmund Burke was an early defender of conservatism, stressing the importance of the accumulated wisdom of past generations and the danger of radical change.[57]
Conservatism is a school of political thought that seeks to preserve and promote traditional institutions and practices. It is typically driven byskepticism about the human ability to radically reconceive and reform society, arguing that such attempts, guided by a limited understanding of the consequences, often result in more harm than good. Conservatives give more weight to the wisdom of historical experience than abstract ideals ofreason. They assert that since established institutions and practices have passed the test of time, they serve as foundations of stability and continuity. Despite its preference for thestatus quo, conservatism is not opposed to political and social change in general but advocates for a cautious approach. It maintains that change should happen as a gradual and natural evolution rather than through radical reform to ensure that political arrangements deemed valuable are preserved.[58]
While the exact institutions and practices to be preserved depend on the specific cultural and historical context of a society, conservatives generally emphasize the importance of family, religion, and national identity. They tend to support private property as a safeguard against state power and some forms of social security for the poor to maintain societal stability.[59]
Distinct strands of conservative thought follow different but overlapping approaches.Authoritarian conservatism prioritizes centralized, established authorities over the judgment of individuals.Traditionalist conservatism sees general customs, conventions, and traditions as the guiding principles that inform both established institutions and individual judgments. Romantic orreactionary conservatism is driven bynostalgia and seeks to restore an earlier state of society deemed superior. Other discussed types includepaternalistic conservatism, which argues that those in power should care for the less privileged, andliberal conservatism, which includes the emphasis on individual liberties and economic freedoms in the conservative agenda.[60]
Different criticisms of conservatism have been proposed. Some focus on its resistance to change and lack of innovation, arguing that prioritizing thestatus quo perpetuates existing problems and stifles progress. In particular, this concerns situations in which rapidly evolving societal challenges require dynamic, flexible, and creative responses. Another objection targets conservative skepticism about the capacity of reason to effectively address complex social issues, arguing that this skepticism is exaggerated and hinders well-thought-out reforms and meaningful improvements. Some critics state that conservatism reinforces established social hierarchies and inequalities, often benefiting privileged social classes while disadvantaging marginalized groups.[61]
As a founder of liberalism,John Locke prioritized individual freedom over state power.[62]
Liberalism is a philosophical tradition emphasizing individualliberties andrights, therule of law,tolerance, andconstitutional democracy. It encompasses a variety of ideas without a precise definition. Some liberals followJohn Locke's view that all individuals are born free and equal, highlighting the government's role in protecting this natural state. Others associate liberalism more with the individual's ability to participate in democratic institutions than with equality. Liberals endorse various forms of liberty, such asfreedom of speech,freedom of religion, and free choice of profession. Liberalism allows for diverse life choices and advocates tolerance of lifestyles different from one's own. This outlook is grounded inoptimism about human nature[j] and trust in the individual's responsibility to make sensible decisions. As a result, liberals assert that the government should remain neutral and uphold the rule of law to allow individuals to pursue their goals without external interference.[64]
Most forms of liberalism support some form offree-market economy andcapitalism. In a free market, the exchange of goods and services occurs with minimal state control and regulation. Instead,privately owned businesses compete with each other, and prices are primarily influenced bysupply and demand.[65] Capitalism is an economic system in which themeans of production are mainly privately owned. This system is typically characterized by a contrast between capitalist owners, who aim tomaximize the profit of their investment, and workers, who sell theirlabor in exchange for asalary.[66]
One broad characterization distinguishes betweenclassical andmodern liberalism, also called social democratic liberalism, based on the role of the state. Classical liberalism seeks to protect the liberties and rights of individuals from government interference, arguing for a limited role of the state. It promotes negative liberty and tasks the state with safeguarding individuals from obstacles or interference from others, such as aggression and theft.[k] Modern liberalism emphasizespositive liberty, arguing that the state should foster conditions that enable individuals to achieve their personal goals. This approach advocates for a more active role of the state to promotesocial justice,equality of opportunity, and the right to a minimalstandard of living. This can include state programs to ensure affordablehealthcare, education for all, andsocial security.[68]
Libertarianism is closely related to classical liberalism. It emphasizes individual liberties and argues that people should be free to do as they want without coercion as long as they do not infringe on the liberty of others. Some libertarians consider thenon-aggression principle—the principle forbidding aggression against a person and their property—as the foundational tenet of libertarianism. Libertarians typically support a free-market economy based on private property and voluntary cooperation. They disapprove of governmental attempts to redistribute wealth and other forms of economic regulation. This view seeks to limit the role of government tocollective defense, the protection of individual rights, and the enforcement of contracts.[69]
Various criticisms of liberalism have been formulated. One objection asserts that its individualistic focus on personal liberties undermines community, arguing that the prioritization of personal freedoms leads tosocial fragmentation. A different criticism proposes that private property and unregulated markets threateneconomic equality and tend to create unjust hierarchies. Further objections argue that liberalism diminishes the common good by reinforcing individualistic social disputes and that its commitments to tolerance and pluralism result incultural relativism.[70]
Socialism is a family of political views emphasizingcollective ownership and equality.[l] It argues that themeans of production belong to the people in general and the workers in particular and should therefore form part of social ownership rather than private property.[73] This outlook understands the state as a complex administrative device that manages resources and production to ensure social welfare and a fair distribution of goods.[74]
A key motivation underlying the socialist perspective is the establishment of equality, which is seen as the natural state of humans. Socialists seek to overcome sources of inequality, such as class systems and hereditary privileges. They are critical ofcapitalism, arguing that private property and free markets reinforce inequalities by leading to large-scale accumulation of private wealth.[75] Some socialists propose systems of regulation andtaxation to mitigate the negative effects of free-market economies.[m] Others reject free-market systems in general and promote different mechanisms to manage the production and distribution of goods, ranging from centralized state control and ownership to decentralized systems that plan and direct economic activity.[75]
Marxism is an influential school of socialism that focuses on the analysis of class relations and social conflicts. It rejects capitalism, arguing that it leads to inequality by dividing society into a capitalist class, which owns the means of production, and a working class, which has to sell its labor and is therebyalienated from the products of its labor. According to this view, economic forces andclass struggles are the primary drivers ofthe historical development of political systems, eventually leading to the downfall of capitalism and the emergence of socialism andcommunism.[77] Communism is usually understood as a radical form of socialism that aims to replace private property with collective ownership and dissolve all class distinctions. InMarxist theory, socialism and communism are considered distinct types ofpost-capitalist societies. From this perspective, socialism is an intermediate stage between capitalism and communism that still carries some features of capitalism, such as material scarcity, a ruling government, anddivision of labor. Marx argued that these features would gradually dissolve, leading to a communist society characterized by material abundance, absence of occupational specialization, and self-organization without a central government.[78][n]
Several objections to socialism focus on its economic theory. Some argue that central planning and the absence of competition and market-driven price signals result in lower productivity and economic stagnation. Another line of criticism asserts that the different ideals motivating socialism are in conflict with each other. For example, the establishment of a massive state required to manage economic activity and social welfare may create new class distinctions, thereby undermining equality.[80] Liberal critics assert that egalitarian redistribution transgresses individual rights and threatens negative liberty. Feminists argue that socialists focus on class distinctions at the expense of gender inequalities, and environmentalists maintain that socialist planning marginalizes environmental concerns.[81]
Environmentalism is a political ideology concerned with the relationship between humans and nature. It seeks to preserve, restore, and enhance thenatural environment, including the protection of landscapes and animals.Anthropocentric environmentalism advocates such policies to improve human life, for example, to mitigate the global consequences ofclimate change or to promote localenvironmental justice by protectingmarginalized groups from regionalenvironmental degradation. This form of environmentalism can be integrated into many other political ideologies, such as conservatism and socialism. Non-anthropocentric environmentalism, also calledecocentrism anddeep ecology, differs by focusing on theintrinsic value of nature itself. This view emphasizes that humans are only a small part of theecosystem as a whole. It seeks to protect and improve nature for its own sake, not only because it serves human interests. This outlook covers diverse and sometimes contrasting interpretations of the relation between humans and nature, including the belief that humans should act as custodians of nature and the idea that modern human civilizations are the source of the problem and threaten natural balance.[82]
Realism is closely associated withNiccolò Machiavelli's emphasis on power, self-interest, and pragmatic governance.[83]
Realism andidealism[o] are two opposing approaches to explaining and guiding political action. According to realism, political activity is primarily driven byself-interest. It asserts that actors pursue power to expand theirsphere of influence. Realists argue that politics should not be limited by moral constraints or shy away from violent conflicts when the power aspirations of different actors collide. They highlight the importance of responding to concrete practical factors, with the primary goal of effectively shaping historical reality rather than pursuing ideals. On the international level, realism holds that the self-interest driving state actors isnot constrained by a superior authority enforcing common rules. Idealism, by contrast, asserts that political action should followmoral principles. It seeks to establish a just and fair social order based on universal ethical norms rather than narrow self-interest. Idealists reject established practices and institutions that promote unjust use of power and seek to replace them with fair governance, even if their idealized vision reflects autopian aspiration distant from current circumstances.[85]
Consequentialism,perfectionism, andpluralism are distinct but overlapping views about which things are valuable and how values should guide political activity. According to consequentialism, the value of any action depends on its concrete consequences.Classical utilitarianism, an influential form of consequentialism, asserts that onlyhappiness orpleasure is ultimately valuable. This view argues that politics should strive to produce the highest overall happiness for the largest number of people.[86]Welfarism, a closely related view, promoteswell-being, which can cover other features in addition to pleasure, such as health,personal growth, meaningfulrelationships, and a sense ofpurpose in life.[87] Perfectionism, a different evaluative outlook, asserts that there are certain objective goods, covering fields like morality, art, and culture, that promote the development of human nature. Although perfectionists disagree about what exactly those goods are, they all maintain that states should establish conditions that promote human excellence among their citizens.[88] Value pluralists assert that diverse values influence political action. They often emphasize that different values can be opposed to each other and that value conflicts cannot always be resolved. For example,Isaiah Berlin argued that liberty and equality are conflicting values and that a gain in one value cannot make up for the loss in the other.[89]
Individualism prioritizes the importance of individuals over the community, an ideal typically promoted by liberal political systems. It asserts that society is at its core made up of individuals and seeks to defend them from social attempts to interfere with their preferred lifestyles. Individualism contrasts withcollectivism, which prioritizes the well-being of groups over individual interests and highlights the importance of group cohesion and unity.Communitarianism is a similar outlook that supports a social structure in which individuals are connected through strong social relationships and shared values. It argues that the personality andsocial identity of individuals are deeply influenced by community relations and social norms.[90]Nationalism extends the focus on social relations to the state as a whole. It is closely associated withpatriotism and promotes social cohesion throughnational identity based on shared customs, culture, and language.[91]
Republicanism is a broad philosophical tradition that emphasizescivic virtue,political participation, and the rule of law. It argues that political action should promote the common good and social equality. This tradition is opposed to oppressive and authoritarian governance, advocating the separation of powers to prevent overconcentration of authority, encouraging citizens to participate in the political process, and seeking to hold the government accountable to the people.[92]Populism, another ideological tendency, encompasses a variety of political outlooks that seek to promote the interests of ordinary people, typically contrasting the will of the people with the agenda of corrupt elites wielding power. The term is often associated with the negative connotation of attempting to gain support from uninformed people by appealing to popular sentiment.[93] Conversely,elitism is the belief that elites, rather than common people, should run the government.[94]
Contractarianism andcontractualism are views about the sources and legitimacy of power. They argue that political authority should be based on some form of consent among the citizens, for example, as an implicit social contract or as what people would reasonably agree to under ideal circumstances.[100]
Postmodernism rejects ideological systems that claim to offer objective, universal truths and adopts a particularly critical attitude towardsEnlightenment ideals of reason and progress. It opposes hierarchical power structures that perpetuate and enforce these ideals, calling instead for resistance to this type of centralized power while promoting a pluralism of local practices and ideologies.[101]Feminism, another critical approach, targets injustice based ongender, aiming to empower women and liberate them from unfairpatriarchal social structures. Feminists focus on many forms of inequality, including social, economic, political, and legal inequality.[102]African political philosophy, a different tradition, is based on the concept ofUbuntu or humanness, asserting that legitimate power should be guided by the communal good, compassion, and mutual respect.[103]
Themethodology of political philosophy[p] examines how to arrive at,justify, and criticizeknowledge claims. It helps solve theoreticaldisagreements, such as disputes about the ideal form of government. Methodological challenges arise from the evaluative ornormative nature of political philosophy as a discipline that studies desirable societal arrangements. Disagreements about normative claims often cannot be directly resolved throughobservation andexperimentation, making them less tractable than disagreements aboutempirical facts. Rational arguments can make a normative theory more plausible or compelling but are frequently not sufficient to lead to definitive or generally accepted solutions. Subjectivists conclude from this difficulty that political philosophy primarily[q] expressessubjective views without a universally accepted rational foundation.[106]
Political philosophers sometimes start fromcommon sense and established beliefs, which they systematically and critically review to assess their validity. This process includes theclarification of basic concepts, which can be used to formalize the underlying beliefs into precise theories while also considering arguments for and against them and exploring alternative views.[107] The methodologies of particularism and foundationalism propose different approaches to this enterprise. Particularists use abottom-up approach and take individual intuitions or assessments of specific circumstances as their starting point. They seek to systematize these individual judgments into a coherent theoretical framework. Foundationalists, by contrast, employ a top-down approach. They begin their inquiry from wide-reaching principles, such as the maxim ofclassical utilitarianism, which evaluates actions and policies based on the pain-pleasure balance they produce. Foundationalism aims to construct comprehensive systems of political thought from a small number of basic principles.[108] The method ofreflective equilibrium forms a middle ground between particularism and foundationalism. It tries to reconcile general principles with individual intuitions to arrive at a balanced and coherent framework that incorporates the perspectives from both approaches.[109]
A historically influential method seeks to justify political theories by reference to human nature, such asThomas Hobbes's social contract theory proceeding from the assumed brutish natural state of humans in a perpetual conflict.[110]
A historically influential form of foundationalism grounds political ideologies in theories abouthuman nature. It can take different forms, like reflections on human needs, abilities, and goals as well as the role of humans in the natural order or in a divine plan. Philosophers use these assumptions about human nature to infer political ideologies about the ideal form of government and other normative theories.[111] For example,Thomas Hobbes believed that the natural state of humans is a perpetual conflict, arguing that a strong state based on a general social contract is necessary to ensure stability and security.[110] An influential criticism of foundationalist approaches centered on human nature argues that one cannot infernormative claims from empirical facts, meaning that empirical facts about human nature do not provide a secure foundation for normative theories about the right form of government.[112]
Foundationalism is typically combined withuniversalism, which asserts that basic moral and political principles apply equally to every culture. Universalists suggest that the foundational values and standards of political action are the same for all societies and remain constant across historical periods.Cultural relativism rejects this transcultural perspective, arguing that norms and values are inherently tied to specific cultures. This view asserts that political principles represent assumptions of specific communities and cannot serve as universal standards for evaluating other cultures.[113]
Methodological individualism andholism are perspectives about the basic units of society. According to methodological individualism, societies are ultimately nothing but the individuals that comprise them. As a result, it analyzes political actions as the actions of the particular people who make decisions and participate within the social structure. This view sees collective entities, like states, nations, and other institutions, as mere byproducts of individual actions. Methodological holists, by contrast, argue for the irreducible existence of collective entities in addition to individuals. They contend that collective entities are more than the sum of their parts and see them as essential elements of political explanations.[114]
Another methodological distinction is betweenrationalism andirrationalism. Rationalists assume that universalreason is or should be the guiding principle underlying political action. They see reason as a common thread that unites diverse societies and can ensure peace between them. Irrationalists reject this assumption and focus on other factors influencing human behavior, including emotions, cultural traditions, and social expectations. Some irrationalists argue forpolylogism, the view that the laws of reason or logic are not universal but depend on cultural context, meaning that the same course of action may be rational from the perspective of one culture and irrational from another.[115][r]
Thought experiments are methodological devices in which political philosophers construct imagined situations to test the validity of political ideologies and explore alternative social arrangements. For example, in his thought experimentoriginal position,John Rawls explores the underlying framework of a just society by imagining a situation in which individuals collectively decide the rules of their society. To ensureimpartiality, individuals do not know which position they will occupy in this society, a condition termedveil of ignorance.[117]
Political philosophy has its roots inantiquity, and many foundational concepts of Western political thought emerged inancient Greek philosophy. Early influential contributions were made by the historianThucydides (460–400 BCE), who inspired the school of realism by analyzing power relations and self-interest as central political factors.[119] Inspired by the ideas ofSocrates (470–399 BCE),Plato (428–348 BCE) discussed the role of the state, its relation to the citizens, the nature of justice, and forms of government. He was critical of democracy and favored autopian monarchy ruled by a wise and benevolentphilosopher king to promote the common good.[120] His studentAristotle (384–322 BCE) objected to Plato's utopianism, preferring a more practical approach to ensurepolitical stability and avoidextremism. He defendedperfectionism, asserting that humans have an inborn goal to develop theirrational and moral capacities and that the state should foster this tendency.[121] InRoman philosophy, the statesmanCicero (106–43 BCE) infused earlier Greek philosophy withStoicism. He asserted that political action should be guided byreason rather than emotion and supported political participation following themeritocratic ideal of rule by the capable.[122]
Diverse traditions of political thought also developed inancient China.Confucianism, initiated byConfucius (551–479 BCE), saw the virtue ofhumaneness or benevolence as the foundation of social order and norms. It sought to balance conflicting interests betweenprivate andpublic spheres, seeing society as an extension of the family.[118]Taoism, another tradition, focused on the relation between humans and nature, arguing that humans should act in harmony withthe natural order of the universe while avoiding excessive desires. It is sometimes associated with anarchism because of its emphasis on natural order, spontaneity, and rejection of coercive authority.[123]Legalism, a realist school of thought, proposed that effective governance of large states requires strict laws based on rewards and punishments to control the harmful effects of personal self-interest.[124] Inancient India, various social and political theories emerged in the 2nd millennium BCE, recorded in theRig Veda, like the idea that the social order is naturally divided intocastes, each fulfilling a different role in society.[125] TheArthashastra, traditionally attributed toKautilya (375–283 BCE),[126] was a political treatise on the essential components of states, such as the king, ministers, territory, and army, describing their nature and interaction.[127]Buddhist political thought, starting in the 6th and 5th centuries BCE, rejected the strict caste division of Hindu society, focusing instead on universal equality,brotherhood, and the reduction of everyone'ssuffering.[128]
Ibn Khaldun distinguished different types of states depending on the primary interests they serve.[129]
Political philosophy in themedieval period was characterized by the interplay between ancient Greek thought and religion.[130]Augustine (354–430 CE) saw states in the human world as fundamentally flawed compared to the divine ideal but also regarded them as vehicles for human improvement and the establishment of peace and order.[131] Influenced by Augustine's philosophy,Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274 CE) developednatural law theory by synthesizingAristotelian andChristian philosophy. He argued that law serves the common good, positing that God rules the world according to theeternal law while humans participate in this plan by following the natural law, which reflects the moral order and can be known directly.[132]
In the Arabic–Persian tradition, philosophers sought to integrate Ancient Greek philosophy withIslamic thought. According toAl-Farabi (872–950), the state is a cooperative entity in which individuals voluntarily work together for common prosperity. Similar to Plato's vision, he imagines a hierarchical structure in which wise philosophers rule.[133]Al-Mawardi (972–1058) developed a complex theory ofcaliphates, examining how this form of government combines religious and political authority in the person of the caliph.[134] Following a descriptive approach,Ibn Khaldun (1332–1406) distinguished between natural states, which serve the worldly interests of the rulers, rational states, which serve the worldly interests of the people, and caliphates, which serve both worldly andotherworldly interests of the people.[129] Other influential contributions were made byAvicenna (980–1037),Al-Ghazali (1058–1111), andAverroes (1126–1198).[135] Meanwhile, in China, starting roughly 960 CE,neo-Confucian thinkers argued fordecentralized governance. They identified two main functions of the government: to organize the social order and tomorally educate citizens.[136]
Inearly modern philosophy, the medieval focus on religion was replaced by asecular outlook. The statesmanNiccolò Machiavelli (1469–1527), often viewed as the founder of modern political philosophy, defended a radical form of political realism, emphasizing the importance of power and pragmatic governance in whichthe ends justify the means.[83]Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679) tried to provide a rational foundation for secular states. He argued that humans are naturally driven byegoism, leading to awar of all against all that can only be avoided through anauthoritarian state justified by a commonsocial contract.[137] As a founder of liberalism,John Locke (1632–1704) also based the state on the consent of the governed but prioritized individual freedom over state power. He suggested that humans are born free and equal, and that the primary objective of the state is to protect this natural condition.[62]David Hume (1711–1776) rejected social contracts as the foundation of the state, asserting instead that governments typically evolve without a prior plan and are accepted by the people because of their utility.[138]Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–1778) introduced the concept of thegeneral will, which is the will of the people to realize the common good.[139] Influenced by Rousseau,Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) argued that laws should reflect the general will of the people, asserting that every citizen has the fundamental right to freedom and the duty to uphold the social contract.[140]Edmund Burke (1729–1797), often considered the father of conservatism, stressed the importance of the accumulated wisdom of past generations while opposing radical change, such as theFrench Revolution.[57]
Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832) developedutilitarianism, promoting the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people.John Stuart Mill (1806–1873) adapted this philosophy to support classical liberalism.[142] According toGeorg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770–1831), the role of the state is the embodiment of ethical life and rational freedom, which he saw best realized in conservative, constitutional monarchies.[143] Influenced by Hegel,Karl Marx (1818–1883) andFriedrich Engels (1820–1895) analyzed the economic forces and class conflicts in capitalist societies, calling for arevolution to replace capitalism with socialism and communism.[71] Another radical reconceptualization of the social order was proposed byPierre-Joseph Proudhon (1809–1865), often regarded as the father ofanarchism, who rejected state authority as an obstacle to liberty and equality.[50][s]
^Political ethics is a subfield at the intersection of these disciplines, studying moral judgments about political actions.[8]
^For example,classical utilitarianism in ethics is the general theory that an act is morally right if it produces "the greatest good for the greatest number". Applied to the field of politics, this principle is used to evaluate institutions and policies.[9]
^The belief that monarchy is the best form of government is known asmonarchism.[18]
^A key difference between the two is that confederalism is a looser association in which the regional governments have sovereignty.[24]
^Similar to colonialism,imperialism andexpansionism are attempts by states to increase their territory and power over other states.[25]
^The two terms are often used as synonyms, but some philosophers distinguish their meanings.[43]
^In a slightly different sense,anarchism refers to a form of political activism that may or may not be motivated by philosophical considerations.[51]
^For example, some anarchists consider states as criminal organizations and the class division they require as inbuilt slavery.[52]
^Progressivism is closely related to liberalism in this regard by its optimistic outlook towards human progress and societal improvement, often combined with liberal or socialist ideologies.[63]
^The resurgence of certain classical liberal principles in the late-20th-century, especially in regard to free markets and limited government, is sometimes termedneoliberalism.[67]
^Left-wing politics is a broad label for political positions associated with socialist andprogressive views, promoting social equality, egalitarianism, the welfare state, and a classless society. It contrasts withright-wing politics, which is linked to conservatism and liberalism, supporting private property, free markets, and nationalism. The two are often understood as poles ofa political spectrum withcentrism, such as theThird Way, as a middle position.[72]
^This type of approach is common forsocial democracies, which typically aim to balance free markets with social welfare while promoting democratic governance.[76]
^Some areas of political philosophy avoid these problems associated with normativity by focusing on the description and definition of political concepts, such aspower andsovereignty. They aim to characterize foundational concepts of political thought rather than recommending what should be done, thereby providing anontology of politics.[105]
^Political epistemology is the branch of political philosophy dedicated to the study of knowledge,rationality, andignorance in political contexts. For example, it examines political effects offake news and voter ignorance.[116]
Arnold, Samuel."Socialism".Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved20 April 2025.
Bai, Tongdong (2025). "18. The Political Philosophy of China". In Gaus, Gerald F.; D'Agostino, Fred; Muldoon, Ryan (eds.).The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy (2nd ed.). Routledge. pp. 189–199.ISBN978-1-00-341159-8.
Belsey, Andrew (2005). "Syndicalism". In Honderich, Ted (ed.).The Oxford Companion to Philosophy. Oxford University Press. p. 906.ISBN978-0-19-926479-7.
Besussi, Antonella (2016). "1. Philosophy and Politics". In Besussi, Antonella (ed.).A Companion to Political Philosophy. Methods, Tools, Topics. Routledge. pp. 3–16.doi:10.4324/9781315564555.ISBN978-1-317-18868-1.
Bobbio, Norberto (2016).Left and Right: The Significance of a Political Distinction. John Wiley & Sons.ISBN978-1-5095-1412-0.
Bramble, Ben (2020). "Welfarism". In LaFollette, Hugh (ed.).International Encyclopedia of Ethics. John Wiley & Sons.ISBN978-1-4443-6707-2.
Brown, Garrett Wallace; McLean, Iain; McMillan, Alistair (2018).The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Politics and International Relations. Oxford University Press.ISBN978-0-19-967084-0.
Caney, Simon (2005).Justice Beyond Borders. Oxford University Press.ISBN978-0-19-829350-7.
Carrillo, Félix (2023). "From Marx to Now: Exploring Collective Ownership, Classlessness, and the Evolving State".Social Science Chronicle.3 (1):1–21.doi:10.56106/ssc.2023.011.
Carter, Ian (2016). "14. Equality". In Besussi, Antonella (ed.).A Companion to Political Philosophy. Methods, Tools, Topics. Routledge.ISBN978-1-317-18867-4.
Cerbone, David R. (2024).Wittgenstein on Realism and Idealism. Cambridge University Press.ISBN978-1-108-92221-0.
Cresswell, Julia (2021).Oxford Dictionary of Word Origins (3 ed.). Oxford University Press.ISBN978-0-19-886875-0.
Crisp, Roger (2021)."Well-Being".The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved15 December 2024.
Crowder, George (2025). "32. Pluralism". In Gaus, Gerald F.; D'Agostino, Fred; Muldoon, Ryan (eds.).The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy (2nd ed.). Routledge. pp. 356–366.ISBN978-1-00-341159-8.
Edenberg, Elizabeth; Hannon, Michael (2021). "Introduction". In Edenberg, Elizabeth; Hannon, Michael (eds.).Political Epistemology. Oxford University Press. pp. 1–10.ISBN978-0-19-289333-8.
Fiala, Andrew (2015)."Glossary". In Fiala, Andrew (ed.).The Bloomsbury Companion to Political Philosophy. Bloomsbury. pp. 227–254.ISBN978-1-4411-1434-1.
Fiala, Andrew (2021)."Anarchism".The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved21 April 2025.
Finkelstein, Claire (2025). "28. Contractarianism". In Gaus, Gerald F.; D'Agostino, Fred; Muldoon, Ryan (eds.).The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy (2nd ed.). Routledge. pp. 307–320.ISBN978-1-00-341159-8.
Freeman, Samuel (2023)."Original Position".The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved4 May 2025.
Gaie, Joseph Balatedi Radinkudikae (2023). "Afircan Political Philosophy". In Imafidon, Elvis; Tshivhase, Mpho; Freter, Björn (eds.).Handbook of African Philosophy. Springer. pp. 283–308.ISBN978-3-031-25149-8.
Gilabert, Pablo; O’Neill, Martin (2024)."Socialism".The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved19 April 2025.
Griffin, James P. (2005). "State, The". In Honderich, Ted (ed.).The Oxford Companion to Philosophy. Oxford University Press. pp. 893–894.ISBN978-0-19-926479-7.
Grunebaum, James O. (2005). "Property". In Honderich, Ted (ed.).The Oxford Companion to Philosophy. Oxford University Press. pp. 762–763.ISBN978-0-19-926479-7.
Gutting, Gary; Oksala, Johanna (2022)."Michel Foucault".The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved11 May 2025.
Hill, Arthur; Moore, Margaret (2025). "Nationalism". In Gaus, Gerald F.; D'Agostino, Fred; Muldoon, Ryan (eds.).The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy (2nd ed.). Routledge. pp. 485–495.ISBN978-1-00-341159-8.
Hoad, T. F. (1996).The Concise Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology. Oxford University Press.ISBN978-0-19-283098-2.
Humphrey, Mathew (2025). "27. Environmentalism". In Gaus, Gerald F.; D'Agostino, Fred; Muldoon, Ryan (eds.).The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy (2nd ed.). Routledge. pp. 293–304.ISBN978-1-00-341159-8.
James, Aaron (2025). "29. Contractualism and Political Liberalism". In Gaus, Gerald F.; D'Agostino, Fred; Muldoon, Ryan (eds.).The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy (2nd ed.). Routledge. pp. 321–332.ISBN978-1-00-341159-8.
Kekes, John (2025). "23. Conservatism". In Gaus, Gerald F.; D'Agostino, Fred; Muldoon, Ryan (eds.).The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy (2nd ed.). Routledge. pp. 249–258.ISBN978-1-00-341159-8.
Kogelmann, Brian; Manor, Aylon (2025). "64. Political Epistemology". In Gaus, Gerald F.; D'Agostino, Fred; Muldoon, Ryan (eds.).The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy (2nd ed.). Routledge. pp. 726–736.ISBN978-1-00-341159-8.
Lane, Melissa (2023)."Ancient Political Philosophy".The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved1 October 2025.
Long, Roderick T. (2025). "21. Anarchism". In Gaus, Gerald F.; D'Agostino, Fred; Muldoon, Ryan (eds.).The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy (2nd ed.). Routledge. pp. 225–236.ISBN978-1-00-341159-8.
Lovett, Frank (2022)."Republicanism".The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved7 May 2025.
Mack, Eric (2024)."Robert Nozick's Political Philosophy".The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved10 May 2025.
March, Andrew F. (2025). "20. Islamic Political Thought". In Gaus, Gerald F.; D'Agostino, Fred; Muldoon, Ryan (eds.).The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy (2nd ed.). Routledge. pp. 211–222.ISBN978-1-00-341159-8.
Martell, Luke (2023). "4. Socialism and Its Critics".Alternative Societies: For a Pluralist Socialism. Policy Press. pp. 112–135.ISBN978-1-5292-2966-0.
May, Todd (2025). "Postmodernism and Politics". In Gaus, Gerald F.; D'Agostino, Fred; Muldoon, Ryan (eds.).The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy (2nd ed.). Routledge. pp. 665–675.ISBN978-1-00-341159-8.
Miller, Dale E. (2025). "30. Utilitarianism and consequentialism". In Gaus, Gerald F.; D'Agostino, Fred; Muldoon, Ryan (eds.).The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy (2nd ed.). Routledge. pp. 333–344.ISBN978-1-00-341159-8.
Miller, David (2025a)."Justice".The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved11 April 2025.
Milner, Helen (1991). "The Assumption of Anarchy in International Relations Theory: A Critique".Review of International Studies.17 (1):67–85.doi:10.1017/s026021050011232x.
Miščević, Nenad (2017). "Thought Experiments in Political Philosophy". In Stuart, Michael T.; Fehige, Yiftach; Brown, James Robert (eds.).The Routledge Companion to Thought Experiments. Routledge. pp. 153–170.ISBN978-1-351-70551-6.
Neal, Patrick (2016). "Politics / Metaphysics". In Besussi, Antonella (ed.).A Companion to Political Philosophy. Methods, Tools, Topics. Routledge. pp. 79–90.doi:10.4324/9781315564555.ISBN978-1-317-18868-1.
Pettit, Philip (2012)."Analytic Philosophy". In Goodin, Robert E.; Pettit, Philip; Pogge, Thomas W. (eds.).A Companion to Contemporary Political Philosophy. John Wiley & Sons. pp. 5–35.ISBN978-1-4443-5087-6.
Pines, Yuri (2023)."Legalism in Chinese Philosophy".The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved8 May 2025.
Raghuramaraju, A. (2025). "19. Indian Political Philosophy". In Gaus, Gerald F.; D'Agostino, Fred; Muldoon, Ryan (eds.).The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy (2nd ed.). Routledge. pp. 200–210.ISBN978-1-00-341159-8.
Rauscher, Frederick (2024)."Kant's Social and Political Philosophy".The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved11 May 2025.
Ricciardi, Mario (2016). "13. Liberty". In Besussi, Antonella (ed.).A Companion to Political Philosophy. Methods, Tools, Topics. Routledge.ISBN978-1-317-18867-4.
Roberts, Margaret E. (2018). "What Is Political Methodology?".PS: Political Science & Politics.51 (3):597–601.doi:10.1017/S1049096518000537.
Roets, E (2022). "Die tradisioneel-konserwatiewe vryheidsbe-skouing van Edmund Burke teenoor dié van moderne konserwatisme".Tydskrif vir Geesteswetenskappe.62 (4):662–679.doi:10.17159/2224-7912/2022/v62n4a3.
Ronzoni, Miriam (2016). "Facts and Principles". In Besussi, Antonella (ed.).A Companion to Political Philosophy. Methods, Tools, Topics. Routledge. pp. 53–64.doi:10.4324/9781315564555.ISBN978-1-317-18868-1.
Sankowski, Edward (2005). "Political Philosophy, History of". In Honderich, Ted (ed.).The Oxford Companion to Philosophy. Oxford University Press. pp. 730–734.ISBN978-0-19-926479-7.
Shipka, Thomas A. (1984). "A Critique of Anarchism".Studies in Soviet Thought.27 (3):247–261.doi:10.1007/bf00831906.
Sigmund, Paul (2025). "3. Aquinas". In Gaus, Gerald F.; D'Agostino, Fred; Muldoon, Ryan (eds.).The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy (2nd ed.). Routledge. pp. 25–35.ISBN978-1-00-341159-8.
Singh, Baljit (1964). "Prophet of Indian Nationalism: A Study of the Political Thought of Sri Aurobindo Gosh, 1893-1910, by Karan Singh".Pacific Affairs.37 (1):96–98.doi:10.2307/2754546.JSTOR2754546.
Tian, Chenshan (2009). "16. Development of Dialectical Materialism in China". In Mou, Bo (ed.).History of Chinese Philosophy. Routledge. pp. 512–538.ISBN978-0-203-00286-5.
Tömmel, Tatjana; d'Entreves, Maurizio Passerin (2025)."Hannah Arendt".The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved9 May 2025.
Tuckness, Alex (2024)."Locke's Political Philosophy".The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved10 May 2025.
Tuckness, Alex; Wolf, Clark (2016).This Is Political Philosophy: An Introduction. John Wiley & Sons.ISBN978-1-118-76600-2.
Vallier, Kevin (2022)."Neoliberalism".The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved19 May 2025.
Van der Vossen, Bas; Christmas, Billy (2024)."Libertarianism".The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved15 April 2025.
Wall, Steven (2025). "Perfectionism". In Gaus, Gerald F.; D'Agostino, Fred; Muldoon, Ryan (eds.).The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy (2nd ed.). Routledge. pp. 345–355.ISBN978-1-00-341159-8.
Walzer, Michael (2005). "Political Obligation". In Honderich, Ted (ed.).The Oxford Companion to Philosophy. Oxford University Press. p. 730.ISBN978-0-19-926479-7.
Wenar, Leif (2021)."John Rawls".The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved10 May 2025.
Whatmore, Richard (2021).The History of Political Thought: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press.ISBN978-0-19-259535-5.
Wolff, Jonathan; Leopold, David (2025)."Karl Marx".The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved7 May 2025.
Yar, Majid."Arendt, Hannah".Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved9 May 2025.
Zuolo, Federico (2016). "Realism and Idealism". In Besussi, Antonella (ed.).A Companion to Political Philosophy. Methods, Tools, Topics. Routledge. pp. 65–78.doi:10.4324/9781315564555.ISBN978-1-317-18868-1.
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
_(cropped).jpg)
