At a Glance

Political Education and Philosophy in Plato and Machiavelli

My complete comparative monograph, entitled Political Education and Philosophy in Plato and Machiavelli, centers around three questions: What is the best way of life? What is the best regime? And what is the nature of the cosmos? I evaluate Plato and Machiavelli's answers to each of these questions through close textual interpretation and attention to the literary aspects of their texts. I argue that their answers are designed to orient founders or potential founders of new regimes and, by extension, the broader community toward a better way of life.

At the same time, both thinkers subtly reveal that their answers are defective. To explain why they do this, I show that Plato and Machiavelli had other, more philosophical readers in mind. By revealing the problems with their answers, both thinkers direct these latter readers away from politics and toward philosophical reflection. Thus, I argue that Plato and Machiavelli have a deep affinity, in that they both seek to educate future political leaders and, at the same time, promote philosophical reflection.

The contribution of this work lies in a distinction yet to be identified in the literature, namely, that between the form and content of Plato’s and Machiavelli’s teachings. Because this distinction has gone unnoticed, the continuity between Plato and Machiavelli—and more broadly between ancient and modern political thought—has been both over- and understated. I demonstrate that while the content of the Discourses is radically new, its form is fundamentally continuous with that of the Laws. What the two thinkers share is not a doctrine, but rather a way of negotiating the relationship between philosophy and politics, which remains instructive today.

Spinoza and Religion at the Foundation of Liberalism

In addition to the topics explored in Political Education and Philosophy, I am currently at work on a new project focusing on how Baruch Spinoza’s engagement with Judaism and Christianity factors into his conceptualization of a secular liberal politics. In contemporary debates over the place of religion in public life, both defenders and critics of the political resurgence of religion assume that liberalism is predicated on secularization and therefore that this resurgence portends the decline of liberal politics. My project examines this assumption at its philosophical source. I extend the analytical framework from my doctoral research to Spinoza’s Ethics, Theologico-Political Treatise, and Political Treatise, arguing that, in these works, Spinoza formulates an anti-theological metaphysics to shape readers into good liberal democratic citizens. Existing scholarship tends to argue either that Spinoza is debunking religion to clear the way for a purely secular politics or that he is drawing on religion as an indispensable resource in his liberal political project. Neither of these readings accurately captures the whole of Spinoza’s project. The dominant reading cannot explain why Spinoza seeks to coopt religion for his liberal politics, while the revisionist reading cannot explain how religion can continue to play an important political role, even after Spinoza has debunked its truth claims. Through close textual interpretation and historical analysis, I contend that Spinoza seeks not to liberate politics from religion nor to politicize religion, but rather to incite anti-theological fervor and mobilize it in the service of a liberal democratic politics. His politics is anti-theological rather than a-theological: its persuasiveness depends on religion as an adversary, and it cannot therefore survive the complete elimination of religion. Ultimately, my research shows that the spirited rejection of theology is constitutive of liberal politics, which suggests that the return of religion to politics may be a sign of liberalism functioning as designed, rather than a symptom of its failure. In my first two years as an Assistant Professor, I plan to publish the results of this research as two articles and a monograph.

Publications

Works in Progress

My teaching focuses on examining key texts in the history of political thought. I find that teaching what one is interested in learning results in greater student engagement. I have taught a course on the history of political thought from Plato to Locke for five years—first as a teaching assistant, then as a course instructor. I am currently the instructor for a course on founding and legislating in Plato’s Laws. The texts in these courses invite us to return to the central questions of political philosophy, and I am therefore always enthusiastic about teaching them. For the same reason, I am well-prepared to teach introductory courses on the history of political philosophy and theory and more advanced courses on themes such as law and legislation, political founding, and disagreement in the history of political thought. I am also prepared to supervise undergraduate and graduate projects in these areas. In my view, the history of political thought is taught well when the texts are presented as reflections on central philosophical questions, because this enables students to see how they inform, extend, or challenge one another. It also encourages students to think about where their own views do (or do not) intersect with the arguments in the texts.

Having completed my higher education in philosophy and political science across three different countries, I have gained a strong understanding of how to engage profitably with students who have different backgrounds and intellectual approaches. This is reflected in my classrooms, where students feel free and supported to engage in intellectual discussion. Since I believe that one-on-one mentoring is the most beneficial mode of education, my tutorials and lectures are designed to be both dialogical and collaborative.