On The Grounds Of Oakeshott's Political Philosophy

Michael Oakeshott was one of the few outstanding political philosophers of the 20^th century. Conservative expressions called him one of the grate Europeans who shaped the present American conservatism just as Leo Strauss, while liberalists put him in the group of liberal masters as Berlin, complied that they had given the most keen and penetrating diagnosis on Modernity. Yet Experience and Its Modes, as Oakeshott's first book, had given the grounds of his political philosophy. What is political philosophy? How to achieve it? What is the nature of it? All these basic questions of political philosophy could be answered through studying Experience and Its Modes.It is my intention in this essay to ground Oakeshott's political philosophy in the contest of the book Experience and Its Modes, clarifying two basic but twisted questions, that is, what is the fundimental problem the book tried to work out, as Oakeshott's academic awareness; and that is, why he used "modes" and "Experience" to solve out, as his philosophy approach. These two linking questions implies the dilemma which philosophy of 20^th century facing as well as Oakeshott's concerns of British Idealism.The introduction compares Oakeshott with traditional conservatism, neo conservatism and liberalism in order to explain the specifics in his philosophy. The first chapter reviews the research on Oakeshott as well as the life of Oakeshott himself so that we can catch the contest of his politic philosophy. Chapter Two looks back on the history of philosophy in order to explain how Oakeshott's political philosophy answered the question rooting in the philosophy itself. Chapter Three compares the history philosophy of Oakeshott and the history philosophy in British Idealism. We will see how some core conception as "experience" and "modes" were developed from British Idealism. The conclusion concluds the specialty of Oakeshott's thoughts in Experience and Its Modes.