Stamatoula Panagakou

Defending Bosanquet's Philosophical Theory of the State: A Reassessment of the ‘Bosanquet-Hobhouse Controversy’

This article focuses on the ‘Bosanquet-Hobhouse controversy’ and defends Bosanquets political philosophy against Hobhouses criticisms. A thorough textual investigation of The Philosophical Theory of the State (supported by references to the Gifford Lectures) demonstrates what Bosanquet actually wrote and rectifies Hobhouses erroneous account of Bosanquets philosophy. My analysis of the principles of self-transcendence and of the dialectic of the finite-infinite clarifies the nature and content of the logico-metaphysical assumptions underlying Bosanquets philosophical theory of the state. I show that Hobhouse misunderstood, misinterpreted and misrepresented Bosanquets views. I elucidate Bosanquets definition of the state, and suggest that his views should be understood in the conceptual context of philosophical Idealism. This article defends Bosanquets idea of the state as the instantiation of ethical life, and explores the logical interdependence between self-transcendence and the attainment of the best life in the context of the state.