Classical Political Thought (PolSci 4100) http://webpages.charter.net/corso/

Dr. Corso

Review of the Literature

A review of the literature is an essay about what has been written on a given topic. It is not, as such, an essay on the topic. The purpose of such a review is to give an intelligent order to the writing on a topic. It does this by assembling, analyzing and categorizing the writings in a meaningful and useful way.

Once you read into a given literature far enough, you will see patterns emerge. These will allow you to group the writings under the various positions, perspectives or approaches they take and to distinguish them from other groups of writings. The trick is to find the meaningful groupings. You won’t get a handle on these until you’ve been through all the literature, but you must formulate—and reformulate—these as you go along. The patterns will emerge only with your actively looking for them.

All of the assigned topics are matters of serious controversy. They are arguments about contemporary political issues. It helps to look at each writing as an argument for a position on one of these issues. As such:

  1. It reaches a conclusion, a substantive position that offers a resolution to the issue at hand.
  2. It uses data, some sort of alleged knowledge of the world, human beings or the nature of reality itself to support its conclusion.
  3. It uses concepts, formulated more or less carefully, to frame and define the issue, the terms of its argument and the position it takes to resolve it.
  4. It employs logic, the rational marshalling of concepts and data as premises from which to draw a conclusion and establish a position on the issue.
  5. It employs unexamined assumptions which frame the issue, and guide the selection of the data, the formulation of the concepts and the choice of the logic used to reach a conclusion. These may be metaphysical, ethical, social, political, religious, aesthetic in nature. Whatever their intellectual formulation, they are also reflective of deep commitments to a particular version of reality

Your analysis and organization of your literature can be based on any or all of these aspects of the arguments these writings contain. It is up to you to decide what provides the clearest, most useful and most significant basis or bases for arranging them. Note that individual works coalesce or separate off from others differently depending on which aspect of their arguments you are considering. This is where a review of the literature becomes an art, not merely a science. It is your job to group and differentiate your literature in the ways that are most meaningful and important. This is a judgment call on your part. A review of the literature not only demands a close analysis and a thorough understanding of the relevant writings, but also a series of decisions based on your own over-all conceptualization of the controversy they deal with. You have to think through and decide what the shape and structure of the controversy are. You will do well to imagine that you want to help the citizens following these public controversies to intelligently take part in them. It also helps to keep in mind that you will know more of the relevant literature than any of your audience. This puts a responsibility on you to respect both your privileged position and the ignorance of your audience. You must teach to help them learn. This responsible teaching and empowering of citizens is the essence of the classical approach to political philosophy. It brings scholarship and critical thinking to bear on politics but in a way which respects the freedom of citizens to make their own decisions in political matters. While your own considered positions on your issue are not irrelevant, your job as a reviewer is to help others reach informed and thoughtful positions. It is not to persuade them to accept yours.

It is important to note here that there is no one right or best way to review any particular literature. There are only better and worse ways. Consequently, as you go through and organize your literature, you have to be constantly reflective and self-critical. There are no formulas for success, only a goal and some very general principles dealing with the reasonable pursuit of that goal. This, by the way, is the essence of the classical approach to ethics.

Learning to do a review of the literature is a pre-requisite to doing serious research in any field. For research purposes, the review points out what has and what has not been looked at, and what conclusions existing studies have reached. It also surveys the various assumptions and methods which others have employed in their work. This allows you, as the new researcher, to see where your work will fit into what’s already been done by others and what it will add to the body of literature it will become part of. It gives you the justification for your research efforts.

It can also be enjoyable, providing a genuine sense of intellectual accomplishment. Unlike research itself, a review of the literature has the form of a complete, closed intellectual system, one with no loose ends or nagging doubts. Of course, it is the reviewer’s decisions which make it a closed system. It takes a bit of ego to do this. But, maybe it’s good to take the chance of showing off and standing up for your own thinking. At least it’ll make things a little more exciting!

Your review should include traditionally printed and internet sources. Popular political controversy occurs in both formats, probably in a more lively and more widely read form on the net. And we are seeing every day, the unreliability of allegedly scholarly works that find their way into even the most “authoritative” print formats. Reference the recent revelation of the Korean scientist who faked the data for his “groundbreaking” stem cell research. But books and articles are still important. In fact, at this time I suggest that you look first to printed sources. Take your lead from these. If you see distinctly and importantly different arguments raised on the internet, work them in. So, consider both formats and judiciously survey both. You should have a fair representation of each. From the library, cover at least 10 articles and 5 books (or parts of books). From the internet, have at least 15 sources. The most important thing is to be as complete as you can about the kinds of arguments that are out there. Although this is not the case elsewhere (e.g., a M.A. thesis, Ph.D. dissertation, some term papers), whether you cover all the works that fall into your chosen categories is not so critical here. You should, though, discuss some in each category to give a good sense of what that kind of argument is like. Again, remember you are teaching citizens so they can take part in the controversy you are considering.

Technically, use 12-point font and 1-inch margins all around. Have a title page and a bibliography. Use the MLS manual of style throughout. This is required. Such manuals of style are helpful ways of presenting your work to readers. They are for both your own and their benefit. The text should run between 6 and 8 pages, exclusive of the title page and bibliography.

In order to keep on track, each of you will make an appointment for a ½ hour conference with the professor between February 20 - 28. At this meeting, you will bring a preliminary bibliography of 15 library and 15 internet sources and a preliminary outline of how you intend to organize this literature. In this outline, show where/how each of these sources fits in and how it relates to the others.

1/15/2006

3