The Concept of Political Judgment and Its Relation to Pluralism in the Thought of Hannah Arendt and Martha Nussbaum

Document Type : Research Paper


1 Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, Tarbiat Modares University

2 PhD in Political Science, Tarbiat Modares University


In Western political philosophy, the concept of judgment is considered as a right, which is related to civil status. In Kant's view, civil status basically means argument and competition between "people’s judgement" and "rulers" with each other. Citizens apply some kind of desirable judgment in civil life by using this right and autonomously. At the same time, the concept of judgment had another fate: it sought to find an answer to the question of whether "our perceptions of things" should be subject to fixed patterns and pre-established standards, or should each citizen make his or her own judgment? Hannah Arendt and Martha Nussbaum are among the philosophers who have begun a philosophical and political confrontation with the concept of judgment. Influenced by the Aristotelian concept of phronesis and its function in specific and changing circumstances, these two thinkers try to offer a pluralistic conception of political judgment, which seeks to establish a good and Eudaemonist life based on a political-normative reading. Using a comparative method, the authors have tried to evaluate the relationship between judgment and pluralism in the thought of these two philosophers. In addition, they express the commonalities and differences between these two philosophers in the field of political judgment.


  1. الف) فارسی

    1. آرنت، هانا (1394). حیات (زندگی) ذهن، ترجمة مسعود علیا، تهران: ققنوس.
    2. ارسطو (1385). اخلاق نیکوماخوس، محمدحسن لطفی، تهران: طرح نو.
    3. ریتزر،جرج (۱۳۹۴). نظریه‌هایجامعه‌شناسیدردورانمعاصر،محسنثلاثی،تهران:علمی.
    4. نوسبام، مارتا (1389). ارسطو، ترجمة عزتالله فولادوند، تهران: طرح نو.
    5. یونسی، مصطفی  (1387). نسبتفلسفۀسیاسیوفلسفۀزبانافلاطون، فرهنگ صبا، تهران: رخداد نو.


    ب) انگلیسی


    1. Arendt, H. (1993a). ‘The Crisis in Culture’ in H. Arendt, Between Past and Future: Eight Exercises in Political Thought, New York: Penguin Books.
    2. ------------ (1993b). ‘The Concept of History’, in H. Arendt, Between Past and Future: Eight Exercises in Political Thought, New York: Penguin Books.
    3. ------------- (1993c). The promise of politics  Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group.
    4. ------------- (1958). The Human Condition, University of Chicago Press: Chicago.
    5. --------------- (1968) .Between Past and Future, New York: Viking Press.
    6. ------------- (1992). The Life of the Mind, Ronald Beiner (ed.), Chicago:  University of Chicago Press.
    7. ------------ (2003). Responsibility and Judgment, Jerome Kohn (ed.), New York: Schocken Books.
    8. ------------ (2006). Truth and Politics, in Between Past and Future: Eight exercises in political thought, New York: Penguin.
    9. -------------- (1992). Lectures on Kant's Political Philosophy, Ronald Beiner (ed.), Chicago University of Chicago Press.
    10. --------------- (2004). ‘Philosophy and Politics’, Social Research, Johns Hopkins University Press, Vol. 71, No. 3, pp. 427-454.
    11. Augustine (1998). City of God, trans. by R.W. Dyson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
    12. Azmanova, Albena (2012). The Scandal of Reason: A Critical Theory of Political Judgment, New York: Columbia University Press.
    13. Beiner, R. (2001). ‘Rereading Hannah Arendt’s Kant Lectures.’ in R. Beiner and J. Nedelsky (eds.), Judgment, Imagination, and Politics: Themes from Kant and Arendt. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
    14. Beiner, Ronald (1983). Political Judgment, New York: Routledge.
    15. Beiner, Ronald (1992). What’s The Matter With Liberalism?, University of California Press.
    16. Benhabib, Seyla (1988). “Judgment and the Moral Foundations of Politics in Arendt's Thought”, Political Theory, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 29-51.
    17. Berlin, I. (2001). ‘My Intellectual Path’ in I. Berlin, The Power of Ideas, (ed.) H. Harvey, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
    18. Gadamer, H.-G. (2004). Truth and Method, (trans.) J. Weinsheimer and D. G. Marshall, London.
    19. Habermas, J. (1995). ‘Reconciliation through the Public Use of Reason: Remarks on John Rawls’s Political Liberalism’, Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 92, No. 3, pp. 109-131.
    20. Haflidson, Ron (2014). Saint Augustine on the Role of the Holy Spirit in Judgment, thesis for Postgraduate Degree (e.g. PhD, MPhil, DClinPsychol) at the University of Edinburgh.
    21. Strauss, Leo, (1988). ‘What Is Political Philosophy?’ And Other Studies, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    22. Mcgeer, Victoria and Pettit, Philip (2009). ‘Sticky Judgment and the Role of Rhetoric’, in Political Judgment: Essays for John Dunn, Richard Bourke and Raymond Geuss (eds.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    23. Nedelsky, J. (2001). ‘Judgment, Diversity, and Relational Autonomy’ in R. Beiner and J. Nedelsky (eds.), Judgment, Imagination, and Politics: Themes from Kant and Arendt, Lanham: MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
    24. Nussbaum, M., (2011). Creating Capabilities: The Human Development Approach, New York: Harvard University Press.
    25. ---------------- (2013). Political Emotions: Why Love Matters for Justice, Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.
    26. -------------------- (2011b) ‘Perfectionist Liberalism and Political Liberalism’, Philosophy & Public Affairs, Vol. 39, No. 1, pp. 3-45.
    27. ----------------- (2001). Upheavals of Thought, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    28. ----------------- (2001b). ‘Political Objectivity’, New Literary History, Vol. 32, No. 4, pp. 883-906.
    29. ----------------- (2004). ‘Emotions as Judgment of Value and Importance’, in Thinking about Feeling: Contemporary Philosophers on Emotions, Robert C. Solomon (ed.), Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    30. ---------------- (2000). ‘Aristotle, Politics, and Human Capabilities: A Response to Antony, Arneson, Charlesworth, and Mulgan’, Ethics. Vol. 111, pp.102-140.
    31. Palmer, John (2017). Contradiction and Aporia in Early Greek Philosophy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    32. Rawls, John (1995). Political Liberalism, New York: Columbia University Press.
    33. ------------------- (2001).Justice as Fairness: A Restatement, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    34. Sen, A. K. (2004). ‘Capabilities, lists, and public reason: continuing the conversation’, Feminist Economics, Vol. 10, No. 3, pp. 77-80.
    35. Sorabji, Richard (2002). Emotion and Peace of Mind, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    36. Steinberger P.J (1993). The concept of Political Judgment, The University of Chicago Press, ix.
    37. Taylor, D. (2012).Hannah Arendt on Judgement: Thinking for Politics’, International Journal of Philosophical Studies, Vol.10, No. 2, pp. 151-169.
    38. Tetlock, Philip E. (2005). Expert Political Judgment: How Good Is It? How Can We Know? Princeton: Princeton University Press.
    39. Vila, Dana (1999). ‘The Philosopher Versus the Citizen: Arendt, Strauss, and Socrates’, Political Theory, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp. 147-172 .
    40. Zerilli, Linda M.G (2006). ‘Truth and Politics’, Theory and Event, Vol. 9 , No.4.
    41. --------------- (2016). A Democratice Theory of Judgment, Chicago: Chicago University Press.
    42. -------------- (2015). ‘Judgment’, The Encyclopedia of Political Thought, Michael T. Gibbons (ed.), London: Blackwell.
Volume 51, Issue 1
April 2021
Pages 99-132
  • Receive Date: 01 September 2020
  • Revise Date: 27 November 2020
  • Accept Date: 27 November 2020
  • First Publish Date: 14 March 2021