Competing historical and “presentist” approaches to political thought do not have a methodological dispute—that is, a disagreement about the most effective scholarly means to an agreed-upon end.
Address: 1737 Cambridge St, CGIS Knafel Building 420, Cambridge MA 02138Scholars studying classic political texts face an important decision: Should these texts be read as artifacts of history or as sources for still-valid insights about politics today?
First, he urged historians of the British Isles to move away from histories of the Three Kingdoms (Scotland, Ireland, England) as separate entities, and he called for studies implementing a bringing-together or conflation of the national narratives into truly integrated enterprises.
It has since become the commonplace preference of historians to treat British history in just that fashion.
He returned to New Zealand to teach at Canterbury University College from 1946 to 1948, and to lecture at the University of Otago from 1953 to 1955.
In 1959, he established and chaired the Department of Political Science at the University of Canterbury.
As is so often the case, Kant’s critical philosophy was decisive.
By demanding that a priori moral inquiry be sharply distinguished from the empirical study of human beings—which he and others at the time called “anthropology”—Kant paved the way for today’s division of labor between moral philosophers and other scholars in the arts and sciences.
Pocock concludes that the issue of New Zealand's sovereignty must be an ongoing shared experience, a perpetual debate leading to several ad hoc agreements if necessary, to which the Māori and Pākehā need to accustom themselves permanently.
The alternative, an eventual rebirth of the violence and bloodshed of the 19th century New Zealand Wars, cannot and must not be entertained.