How to Read James Fitzjames Stephen: Technocracy and Pluralism in a Misunderstood Victorian

This paper offers a new reading of the political thought of the mid-Victorian jurist and intellectual James Fitzjames Stephen. Contrary to impressions of Stephen as a conservative or religious authoritarian, this article recognizes the liberal character of Stephen’s thought, and it argues that inves...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The American political science review 2021-08, Vol.115 (3), p.1034-1047
1. Verfasser: CONTI, GREGORY
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1047
container_issue 3
container_start_page 1034
container_title The American political science review
container_volume 115
creator CONTI, GREGORY
description This paper offers a new reading of the political thought of the mid-Victorian jurist and intellectual James Fitzjames Stephen. Contrary to impressions of Stephen as a conservative or religious authoritarian, this article recognizes the liberal character of Stephen’s thought, and it argues that investigating Stephen’s liberalism holds lessons for us today about the structure of liberal theory. Stephen, the paper demonstrates, articulated robustly both technocratic and pluralistic visions of politics. Perhaps more stridently than any Victorian, he put forward an argument for the necessity and legitimacy of expert rule against claims for popular government. Yet he also insisted on the plurality of perspectives on public affairs and on the ineluctable conflict between them. Because both of these facets existed in his work, he fit within the liberal ranks, but he did not show how the two dimensions fit together. The tension that we discover from reading Stephen is, the article concludes, not peculiar to him, but a permanent feature of liberal theories, which always include both technocratic and pluralistic elements.
doi_str_mv 10.1017/S0003055421000411
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2555881393</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cupid>10_1017_S0003055421000411</cupid><sourcerecordid>2555881393</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c302t-f13efcdd38a3665155b9a9d1b1b2f56e2483bb7826e10bc8a4f66a1b073121603</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1UE1LwzAYDqLgnP4AbwHP1bxNk6beZKhTJoqbXjyUfNVlrM1MWmT-ejs38CCe3ufl-YIHoVMg50Agv5gSQihhLEuhRxnAHhoAo3nCiozuo8GGTjb8ITqKcdG_BIgYoLex_8Stx89WGnwvaxvxjWu_Fj9o2trV3DaXeGb1vPE6SL3GsjH4adkFuXSxxq7BEj-42DXGhth6b_Cr060PTjbH6KCSy2hPdneIXm6uZ6NxMnm8vRtdTRJNSdomFVBbaWOokJRzBoypQhYGFKi0YtymmaBK5SLlFojSQmYV5xIUySmkwAkdorNt7ir4j87Gtlz4LjR9ZZkyxoQAWtBeBVuVDj7GYKtyFVwtw7oEUm42LP9s2HvoziNrFZx5t7_R_7u-AbVCcg0</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2555881393</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>How to Read James Fitzjames Stephen: Technocracy and Pluralism in a Misunderstood Victorian</title><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>Cambridge University Press Journals Complete</source><creator>CONTI, GREGORY</creator><creatorcontrib>CONTI, GREGORY</creatorcontrib><description>This paper offers a new reading of the political thought of the mid-Victorian jurist and intellectual James Fitzjames Stephen. Contrary to impressions of Stephen as a conservative or religious authoritarian, this article recognizes the liberal character of Stephen’s thought, and it argues that investigating Stephen’s liberalism holds lessons for us today about the structure of liberal theory. Stephen, the paper demonstrates, articulated robustly both technocratic and pluralistic visions of politics. Perhaps more stridently than any Victorian, he put forward an argument for the necessity and legitimacy of expert rule against claims for popular government. Yet he also insisted on the plurality of perspectives on public affairs and on the ineluctable conflict between them. Because both of these facets existed in his work, he fit within the liberal ranks, but he did not show how the two dimensions fit together. The tension that we discover from reading Stephen is, the article concludes, not peculiar to him, but a permanent feature of liberal theories, which always include both technocratic and pluralistic elements.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0003-0554</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1537-5943</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/S0003055421000411</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York, USA: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Essays ; Historical Interpretation ; Historiography ; History ; Impressions ; Intellectual History ; Legitimacy ; Liberalism ; Morality ; Philosophers ; Political Attitudes ; Political philosophy ; Political science ; Political theory ; Politics ; Social Problems ; Technocracy ; Victorian period</subject><ispartof>The American political science review, 2021-08, Vol.115 (3), p.1034-1047</ispartof><rights>The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the American Political Science Association</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c302t-f13efcdd38a3665155b9a9d1b1b2f56e2483bb7826e10bc8a4f66a1b073121603</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-5099-7636</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0003055421000411/type/journal_article$$EHTML$$P50$$Gcambridge$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>164,314,780,784,12845,27924,27925,55628</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>CONTI, GREGORY</creatorcontrib><title>How to Read James Fitzjames Stephen: Technocracy and Pluralism in a Misunderstood Victorian</title><title>The American political science review</title><addtitle>Am Polit Sci Rev</addtitle><description>This paper offers a new reading of the political thought of the mid-Victorian jurist and intellectual James Fitzjames Stephen. Contrary to impressions of Stephen as a conservative or religious authoritarian, this article recognizes the liberal character of Stephen’s thought, and it argues that investigating Stephen’s liberalism holds lessons for us today about the structure of liberal theory. Stephen, the paper demonstrates, articulated robustly both technocratic and pluralistic visions of politics. Perhaps more stridently than any Victorian, he put forward an argument for the necessity and legitimacy of expert rule against claims for popular government. Yet he also insisted on the plurality of perspectives on public affairs and on the ineluctable conflict between them. Because both of these facets existed in his work, he fit within the liberal ranks, but he did not show how the two dimensions fit together. The tension that we discover from reading Stephen is, the article concludes, not peculiar to him, but a permanent feature of liberal theories, which always include both technocratic and pluralistic elements.</description><subject>Essays</subject><subject>Historical Interpretation</subject><subject>Historiography</subject><subject>History</subject><subject>Impressions</subject><subject>Intellectual History</subject><subject>Legitimacy</subject><subject>Liberalism</subject><subject>Morality</subject><subject>Philosophers</subject><subject>Political Attitudes</subject><subject>Political philosophy</subject><subject>Political science</subject><subject>Political theory</subject><subject>Politics</subject><subject>Social Problems</subject><subject>Technocracy</subject><subject>Victorian period</subject><issn>0003-0554</issn><issn>1537-5943</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp1UE1LwzAYDqLgnP4AbwHP1bxNk6beZKhTJoqbXjyUfNVlrM1MWmT-ejs38CCe3ufl-YIHoVMg50Agv5gSQihhLEuhRxnAHhoAo3nCiozuo8GGTjb8ITqKcdG_BIgYoLex_8Stx89WGnwvaxvxjWu_Fj9o2trV3DaXeGb1vPE6SL3GsjH4adkFuXSxxq7BEj-42DXGhth6b_Cr060PTjbH6KCSy2hPdneIXm6uZ6NxMnm8vRtdTRJNSdomFVBbaWOokJRzBoypQhYGFKi0YtymmaBK5SLlFojSQmYV5xIUySmkwAkdorNt7ir4j87Gtlz4LjR9ZZkyxoQAWtBeBVuVDj7GYKtyFVwtw7oEUm42LP9s2HvoziNrFZx5t7_R_7u-AbVCcg0</recordid><startdate>202108</startdate><enddate>202108</enddate><creator>CONTI, GREGORY</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>DPSOV</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>KC-</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M2L</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5099-7636</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202108</creationdate><title>How to Read James Fitzjames Stephen: Technocracy and Pluralism in a Misunderstood Victorian</title><author>CONTI, GREGORY</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c302t-f13efcdd38a3665155b9a9d1b1b2f56e2483bb7826e10bc8a4f66a1b073121603</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Essays</topic><topic>Historical Interpretation</topic><topic>Historiography</topic><topic>History</topic><topic>Impressions</topic><topic>Intellectual History</topic><topic>Legitimacy</topic><topic>Liberalism</topic><topic>Morality</topic><topic>Philosophers</topic><topic>Political Attitudes</topic><topic>Political philosophy</topic><topic>Political science</topic><topic>Political theory</topic><topic>Politics</topic><topic>Social Problems</topic><topic>Technocracy</topic><topic>Victorian period</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>CONTI, GREGORY</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection</collection><collection>Politics Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Politics Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Education Database (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Political Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>One Business (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>The American political science review</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>CONTI, GREGORY</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>How to Read James Fitzjames Stephen: Technocracy and Pluralism in a Misunderstood Victorian</atitle><jtitle>The American political science review</jtitle><addtitle>Am Polit Sci Rev</addtitle><date>2021-08</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>115</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>1034</spage><epage>1047</epage><pages>1034-1047</pages><issn>0003-0554</issn><eissn>1537-5943</eissn><abstract>This paper offers a new reading of the political thought of the mid-Victorian jurist and intellectual James Fitzjames Stephen. Contrary to impressions of Stephen as a conservative or religious authoritarian, this article recognizes the liberal character of Stephen’s thought, and it argues that investigating Stephen’s liberalism holds lessons for us today about the structure of liberal theory. Stephen, the paper demonstrates, articulated robustly both technocratic and pluralistic visions of politics. Perhaps more stridently than any Victorian, he put forward an argument for the necessity and legitimacy of expert rule against claims for popular government. Yet he also insisted on the plurality of perspectives on public affairs and on the ineluctable conflict between them. Because both of these facets existed in his work, he fit within the liberal ranks, but he did not show how the two dimensions fit together. The tension that we discover from reading Stephen is, the article concludes, not peculiar to him, but a permanent feature of liberal theories, which always include both technocratic and pluralistic elements.</abstract><cop>New York, USA</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><doi>10.1017/S0003055421000411</doi><tpages>14</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5099-7636</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0003-0554
ispartof The American political science review, 2021-08, Vol.115 (3), p.1034-1047
issn 0003-0554
1537-5943
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2555881393
source Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; Cambridge University Press Journals Complete
subjects Essays
Historical Interpretation
Historiography
History
Impressions
Intellectual History
Legitimacy
Liberalism
Morality
Philosophers
Political Attitudes
Political philosophy
Political science
Political theory
Politics
Social Problems
Technocracy
Victorian period
title How to Read James Fitzjames Stephen: Technocracy and Pluralism in a Misunderstood Victorian
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T22%3A45%3A38IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=How%20to%20Read%20James%20Fitzjames%20Stephen:%20Technocracy%20and%20Pluralism%20in%20a%20Misunderstood%20Victorian&rft.jtitle=The%20American%20political%20science%20review&rft.au=CONTI,%20GREGORY&rft.date=2021-08&rft.volume=115&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=1034&rft.epage=1047&rft.pages=1034-1047&rft.issn=0003-0554&rft.eissn=1537-5943&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/S0003055421000411&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2555881393%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2555881393&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_cupid=10_1017_S0003055421000411&rfr_iscdi=true