Abstract
Ryan Patrick Hanley makes two original claims about François Fénelon: (1) that he is best regarded as a political philosopher, and (2) that his political philosophy is best understood as “moderate and modern.” In what follows, I raise two concerns about Hanley’s revisionist turn. First, I argue that the role of philosophy in Fénelon’s account is rather as a handmaiden of theology than as an autonomous area of inquiry—with implications for both the theory and practice of politics. Second, I use Fénelon’s writings on the education of women as an illustration of the more radical and reactionary aspects of his thought. Despite these limits, the book makes a compelling case for recovering Fénelon and opens up new conversations about education, religion, political economy, and international relations in early modern political thought.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 580-586 |
| Number of pages | 7 |
| Journal | European Journal of Political Theory |
| Volume | 20 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Jul 2021 |
Keywords
- Education
- Fénelon
- Locke
- political philosophy
- Rousseau
- theology
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'François Fénelon: Modern philosopher or conservative theologian?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver