Customer Reviews

Political Thinking: The Perennial Questions (6th Edition)

5 star:		(9)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

I have assigned Tinder's book for years in my university Political Theory course. (As have many others, given it is in its sixth edition.) It is the single finest text I have ever found for a general theory course. Tinder provides by means of a thoughtful, open-minded series of broad question and answer segments perhaps the most accessible work to undergraduate students I have ever seen in Political Theory. (Others have tried this approach with less success.) The book's style and structure are equally effective for one looking for a layman's understanding of the important contemporary questions in Political Theory. Readers interested in the relationship of politics and metaphysics (theology is a particular interest of Tinder) will find the text especially valuable. Its ability to deal with highly complex questions in such an engaging style leads me to provide the highest recommendation.

I first read this book as an undergrad, and now as a graduate student in politcal theory, I still find my self going back to its books lists for further reading. Tinder does what so few popularizers of complex issues fail at--making a hard, relevant discipline accessible without oversimplifying, without denying its complexity. Political philosophers, especially those in philosophy departments, should follow Tinder's example.

Glenn Tinder's _Political Thinking: The Perennial Questions_ is an interesting introduction to the study of political philosophy and political theory. It was assigned for an intro to political studies class I am currently enrolled in. The book's largest strength is that it presents various viewpoints on politics and focuses on numerous profound questions: estrangement and unity, inequality and equality, who should possess, what are the limitations and what are the proper end of power, and historical change. Tinder concludes his book with a thesis of "humane uncertainty." He notes how there are no exact and definite solutions to the world's political problems and that one should be extremely wary of any revolutionary political agenda, from either the right or the left, which promises a perfect world if all of its demands are met. He also takes into close consideration, as another reviewer notes, "the relationship between politics and metaphysics." Tinder notes well how faith in traditional orthodox Christianity has been on the downswing in Western societies during the past several centuries and how materialistic, man-centered methods of thinking have gained ascendancy in today's societies. Tinder's most sobering reflection is a hypothetical example of someone, someday establishing a perfect society on earth, totally eradicating injustice (in whatever form injustice may be correctly conceived). This perfect society would eventually die out anyway and fade into oblivion with each successive generation of human beings over time. Human history points toward an ultimate abyss as time passes making any achievement of a perfect society irrelevant in the overarching scheme of phenomena.

This review is a response to an earlier review that claimed Tinder's book was anti-American and critical of conservatives. As an American, a devout Christian, and a conservative Republican, I felt obliged to say that I found this book to be exceedingly even-handed and quite honest in its portrayals. There isn't a single perspective in the book that isn't compared and contrasted with several other opposing perspectives. He devotes space to the strengths and weaknesses of each ideology. His tone is respectful.

The only agenda in this book is to spur deeper and clearer thinking. To that end, it succeeds marvelously. And it's concise.

This book was required reading for my Political Science class. At first I found it hard to read, but once I grew accustomed to the language I thouroughly enjoyed it. Anyone interesed in political philosophy should own a copy of this book.

Perhaps the greatest reference work on one of the most difficult topics humanity faces: political philosophy. It's depth of analysis and provocative insight propel the reader to new heights of personal reflection and understanding, successfully assisting civilization in its struggle to become something we cannot be. I thank the author.

The shipping was on time. The book is excellent. Discusses all points of view and really makes you think and get to know your own ideas and perspectives.

I had to read selections of this book for my Normative Political Theory course. My prof has been using this book for years now and hasn't changed one bit. The questions Tinder addresses are very significant to the field of political science and normative political theory. I really enjoyed the discussion about the questions Tinder addresses in the book.

Glen Tinder's book is a modern day classic. There's no spin doctoring here. He backs up his points with common sense that are insightful,to the point, and very thorough. If you want an introduction to the world at large this is it--!!!

I just finished this book for a Political Science class at the local community college. The premise of the book is that the author will provide no answers to the questions presented and so much of the work is devoted towards painting hypothetical situations for the reader to consider. However, when he does make a concise, unabiguous statement, it is often anti-American and anti-Conservative and presentative as a statement of fact. Conservatives are mean-spirited and support class distinctions. Liberals are all for equality and the goodness of man. His chapter on feminism would lead one to believe that all women consider men the enemy and that simply isn't the case.

It was amusing how he considered American intellectuals to be university professors, journalists and writers. Given the state of our education system and our mass media and the lack of idealogical diversity in both areas, I think his characterization expired about 50 years ago.

The book is also somewhat anachronistic with many references to The Establishment ala the 1960's and has a strong pro-Marxist bent. Naturally, capitalism is bad.

The writing itself is poorly organized, but what bother me the most was that when he did make clear statements one way or another it was to criticize America or conservatives.