The Ambivalence of Political Courage

Bibliographic Data

ID6402261
AuthorsJason A Scorza (corresponding author)
Year2001
Volume63
Issue4
Pages637-662
Publication date2001-01-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueThe Review of Politics (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0034-6705 • E-ISSN: 1748-6858
PublisherCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/s0034670500032113
OpenAlexW2099334639
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited18

Historically many political theorists have closely associated the practice of politics with the disposition of courage. During the past two centuries or so, however, some theorists—particularly liberals—have striven to tame the concept of politics, emphasizing the importance of gentler qualities such as toleration, civility, compassion, and reasonableness over the more bellicose quality of courage. But liberals are far from unanimous on this point. Judith Shklar, for instance, is more ambivalent about courage, recognizing both the continued relevance of moral courage for liberalism's long, difficult struggle against cruelty and fear and, at the same time, acknowledging the dangers of endowing the concept of politics with a heroic quality. Taking Shklar's ambivalence as a starting place, this article explores the current relevance of courage for politics

Ambivalence · Civility · Classical liberalism · Compassion · Courage · Environmental ethics · Liberalism · Moral courage · Political science · Politics · Psychoanalysis · Relevance (law · Sociology · Law · Leadership, Courage, and Heroism Studies · Philosophy · Psychology · Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub