This book offers a reassessment of the political philosophy of the British Idealists, a group of once influential and now neglected nineteenth-century Hegelian philosophers, whose work has been much misunderstood. Peter Nicholson focuses on F. H. Bradley's idea of morality and moral philosophy; T. H. Green's theory of the Common Good, of the social nature of rights, of freedom, and of state interference; and Bernard Bosanquet's notorious theory of the General Will. By examining the arguments offered by the Idealists and (...) by their critics the author is able to penetrate the deep layers of hostile comment laid down by several generations of later writers and to show that these ideas, once properly understood, are not only defensible but interesting and important. (shrink)

In his incisive and provocative analysis, ‘The place of punishment in Kant's Rechtslehre’, Paul Gorner discusses many aspects of Kant's position. I concentrate on his main contention:Kant's justification of judicial punishment simply does not fit the account of right he gives in the Rechtslehre. According to this account the only justification for coercion is that it constitutes a ‘hindering of a hindrance’ to freedom. But there is no way in which this requires punishment to be retributive.

Bosanquet was one of the most Hegelian of the British Idealist philosophers, and also one of the most prolific and wide ranging in his writings. This bibliography lists: I. books, pamphlets, contributions to books, articles, discussions, letters to th etc.; II. book reviews and critical notices; III. private letters which have been published; and IV. unpublished private letters. Certain other material, less easy to classify, is mentioned here.

In spite of the recent surge of publication on Hegel’s social and political thought, the political ideas of the Phenomenology have remained relatively neglected. A volume devoted to them is thus welcome, especially from Professor Shklar, whose earlier books were exceptionally clear, able, and stimulating.

The nine papers and two comments in this collection, unobtrusively edited by Merold Westphal, were presented to the Hegel Society of America in 1978. Although they follow no overall plan, and do not cover the Phenomenology systematically or comprehensively, they raise many of the most significant questions. It is helpful to find some of these issues tackled by several of the contributors from different angles though with complementary emphases. All the papers are clearly argued, free of unexplained Hegelian terminology, commendably (...) concise, and extend our understanding of Hegel. They constitute a good collection to be warmly welcomed. (shrink)

To write any kind of commentary on Hegel’s Philosophy of Right is a daunting undertaking. Although the book’s overall plan appears to be clear in a general way, some of Hegel’s moves and conclusions are not; his philosophical premises often need to be made explicit and call for elucidation; and the development of his ideas in detail is uneven, throwing up many problems of interpretation, including passages which may easily be understood incompletely or even completely misunderstood. The result is that (...) the reader can get lost. In particular one’s attention can be distracted from Hegel’s essential point. This is one reason why anyone grappling with the Philosophy of Right will welcome the assistance to be gained from Michael Mitias. His book sets out to make visible the basic structure of the Philosophy of Right and to provide a clear guide to the main line of its argument. Mitias is largely successful. His outline and analysis help one to move about Hegel’s argument with greater confidence and to understand better its various parts both in themselves and in relation to the whole. (shrink)