La política de la fe y la política del escepticismo

by Michael Oakeshott

What should governments do? Arguing that while some political thinkers have thought it proper for humans to control as far as possible, and others have argued for a free approach to government, this text suggests the most desirable form of government lies somewhere between these interpretations.

Genres: Politics, Philosophy, Nonfiction

181 pages, Paperback

First published May 11, 1996

About the author

English philosopher and political theorist who wrote about philosophy of history, philosophy of religion, aesthetics, and philosophy of law. He is widely regarded as one of the most important conservative thinkers of the 20th century, although he has sometimes been characterized as a liberal thinker.
Oakeshott was dismayed by the descent into political extremism that took place in Europe in the 1930s, and his surviving lectures from this period reveal a dislike of National Socialism and Marxism.
In 1945, Oakeshott was demobilized and returned to Cambridge for two years. In 1947, he left Cambridge for Nuffield College, Oxford. After only a year, he secured an appointment as Professor of Political Science at the London School of Economics (LSE), succeeding Harold Laski. He was deeply unsympathetic to the student action at LSE that occurred in the late 1960s, on the grounds that it disrupted the aims of the university. Oakeshott retired from LSE in 1969.
Oakeshott refused an offer of Knighthood from Queen Elizabeth II, for which he was proposed by Margaret Thatcher.

Reviews

[KOP · Rating 5 out of 5]

todo mundo deveria ler oakeshott

[Lucas Magrini Rigo · Rating 3 out of 5]

Confesso que esperava mais do livro, dada a reputação do autor. Os conceitos dos dois modos de política apresentados são realmente interessantes e explicados com relativo sucesso, mas não gostei particularmente do modo como o autor escreve. Por exemplo, ele cita a política atual mas não sabe-se o ano referido, supõe-se a data de publicação (anos 90). Isso leva a outro problema que são os exemplos abstratos, em que o autor para explicar um conceito deseja dar exemplos mas não escolhe exemplos concretos. Por isso, achei o livro desnecessariamente longo, até mesmo por ter trechos repetidos.
O livro se salva com o posfácio, em que é retratada brevemente a vida e obras do autor e uma contextualização deste livro.

[Rutasel · Rating 3 out of 5]

While i think oakeshott makes some good analysis of these different political styles and i understand this is a theoretical book some examples wouldve given his Analysis some more grounding while also showing the limits of the Analysis as a tool to understand politics

[Mark Mills · Rating 3 out of 5]

Some interesting arguments but even for a work of political theory it's a bit abstract and prone to generalisation.

[Mariana Pietrini · Rating 5 out of 5]

Quisiera poder decir algo inteligente sobre un libro tan complejo e interesante, pero sólo puedo decir: ODIO LOS EXTREMOS DE LO QUE SEA. Nada en extremo sirve. Mucho menos posiciones políticas.