Michael Oakeshott

Question 1

Oakeshott’s view on human nature

Answer 1

Adopted a forgiving stance, arguing people were ‘fallible but not immoral’

Although against the ‘perfect’ societies believed by other ideologies, believed humanity was still able to achieve ‘both pleasure and improvement through humdrum business of everyday life’

Question 2

Oakeshott’s optimistic view of conservatism

Answer 2

Argued that ideologies such as socialism or liberalism had views of how society ‘should’ be, and this only led to impatience, intolerance + frustration

Oakeshott thought that because conservatives had accepted humans’ imperfections, they had a greater appreciation of the pleasures that already exist in life.
E.g. family or friends

Question 3

Oakeshott’s pragmatic approach

Answer 3

Dismissed ‘normative’ politics due to it disregarding ‘the complex of now’

Held a pragmatic and empirical (based on observation / experience) to politics + life

Wisdom achieved through experience and trial + error, rather than abstract philosophy

Question 4

Oakeshott’s view of the state

Answer 4

Detailed in final work ‘The politics of faith and the politics of scepticism’

Argued the state existed to ‘prevent the bad rather than create the good’ - restating best things in life emerge from routine, apolitical activity

‘We all sail a boundless sea, with no appointed destination’
The job of government is
‘Keeping the ship afloat at all costs … using experience to negotiate every storm, stoicism (self-control) to accept every necessary change of direction … and not fixating on a port that does not exist’

Question 5

Oakeshott’s critics

Answer 5

Critics are especially from new-right conservatism

Claim his philosophy is too fatalistic + underestimates our ability to shape circumstances

New right believes (e.g. Nozick) believed Oakeshott’s mentality was ‘lazy’ leading to socialist ideas to go unquestioned after 1945