Dissertation Project: Tocqueville and Mill on Doubt and the Demands of Democratic Citizenship
Many contemporary democratic theorists agree that a willingness to think critically about authority constitutes a desirable disposition for citizens. Yet while this quality may be salutary, it is not always or necessarily so. An excess of skepticism can corrode the foundations of social order. I turn to Alexis de Tocqueville and John Stuart Mill to understand better the conditions under which skepticism can be a constructive rather than corrosive force for democratic politics. My investigation demonstrates that both authors thought, albeit for different reasons, that a proclivity to independent-mindedness and critical thinking was in some way endogenous to democracy as a regime type. I also show that Tocqueville’s approach to disciplining and directing this tendency focused mainly on cultivating and preserving dogmatic beliefs and encouraging political participation, while Mill emphasized the direct leadership of intellectuals and the power of aesthetic culture. In addition to adding to our understanding of Tocqueville and Mill, this project also addresses unanswered questions that contemporary democratic theory raises.
Articles and Working Papers
"Tocqueville on Intellectual Independence, Doubt, and Democratic Citizenship" (Forthcoming in The Review of Politics)
Some contend that politics functions best with deference to tradition and authoritative community norms, while others argue for independent thought and doubt of received of authority. Insight into this question can be found in the work of Alexis de Tocqueville. While Tocqueville is often taken to regard the doubt characteristic of intellectual independence solely as a pathology, I show that he also saw it as potentially providing a precursor to conversation, a stimulus to self-assured conviction, and a counter to distortionary abstractions. Nonetheless, Tocqueville also elaborates the destructive outcomes of too much doubt and intellectual independence. I identify the ways in which he seeks to discipline and educate the drive to independent thought so as to attain its benefits without falling victim to its pathologies. In doing so, I demonstrate how Tocqueville can be a guide to how to navigate the perennial tension between intellectual inquiry and authoritative community norms.
Many contemporary democratic theorists agree that a willingness to think critically about authority constitutes a desirable disposition for citizens. Yet while this quality may be salutary, it is not always or necessarily so. An excess of skepticism can corrode the foundations of social order. I turn to Alexis de Tocqueville and John Stuart Mill to understand better the conditions under which skepticism can be a constructive rather than corrosive force for democratic politics. My investigation demonstrates that both authors thought, albeit for different reasons, that a proclivity to independent-mindedness and critical thinking was in some way endogenous to democracy as a regime type. I also show that Tocqueville’s approach to disciplining and directing this tendency focused mainly on cultivating and preserving dogmatic beliefs and encouraging political participation, while Mill emphasized the direct leadership of intellectuals and the power of aesthetic culture. In addition to adding to our understanding of Tocqueville and Mill, this project also addresses unanswered questions that contemporary democratic theory raises.
Articles and Working Papers
"Tocqueville on Intellectual Independence, Doubt, and Democratic Citizenship" (Forthcoming in The Review of Politics)
Some contend that politics functions best with deference to tradition and authoritative community norms, while others argue for independent thought and doubt of received of authority. Insight into this question can be found in the work of Alexis de Tocqueville. While Tocqueville is often taken to regard the doubt characteristic of intellectual independence solely as a pathology, I show that he also saw it as potentially providing a precursor to conversation, a stimulus to self-assured conviction, and a counter to distortionary abstractions. Nonetheless, Tocqueville also elaborates the destructive outcomes of too much doubt and intellectual independence. I identify the ways in which he seeks to discipline and educate the drive to independent thought so as to attain its benefits without falling victim to its pathologies. In doing so, I demonstrate how Tocqueville can be a guide to how to navigate the perennial tension between intellectual inquiry and authoritative community norms.
