I’m working on putting together an anthology of readings in political philosophy. The book is aimed for use in undergraduate courses and will have both classic (e.g. Locke, Hobbes) and contemporary (e.g. Rawls, Dworkin) sources. It will contain about 40 readings, and these readings should generally be at a level where they can be accessible (if challenging) to non-philosophy majors (political philosophy courses, in my experience, draw a lot of ‘pre-law’ students who major in something other than philosophy). What I hope will be distinctive about the collection is its use of ‘non-standard’ readings to illustrate, motivate, and explain certain core ideas. ‘Non-standard’ readings could come from literature, economics, sociology, psychology, etc.
I was hoping I could exploit PEA Soup readers for a bit of market research. I’d love to hear what you like and don’t like to use in teaching political philosophy.
1) What do you consider ‘must reads’ in a political philosophy course?
2) What ‘standard’ readings do you consider overrated and dispensable?
3) Do you have any ‘non-standard’ readings that you like to use in class, or that you’ve thought about using?
Answers to these questions in the comments section would be great. Even better, if you want to email me your syllabus, I’d love to take a look at it. Send it to mzwolinski àatß sandiego *dot* edu.