ENGL 298 B: Intermediate Writing Social Sciences   Autumn 2011, University of Washington

I think the most difficult part about political science has been oversimplifying each theory. We have read a multitude of texts, which on one hand leads to a better understanding through readings addressing weaknesses of particular states. However, this can also lead to a broader description of each text; rather than a more general recollection of each text, I think it is important to have a deeper, more specific remembrance. On this note, I think it is really hard to put yourself in the shoes of the author. In approaching a reading with bias you are lessening your understanding of these texts. This problem occurs from the want to analyze and pick apart their arguments during the act of reading. Instead I need to first completely read, evaluate, and comprehend said arguments before I am able to critique them.
Furthermore, I think that Locke’s and Hobbes’ theories have been the easiest parts of political theory to grasp. This is because we have spent a great deal of time on both – I have written two, five page papers contrasting their ideas. Together, Locke and Hobbes generate very distinct forms of government that play off each other; through Hobbes and Locke viewing the state of nature in their own distinct way, they create different needs of their government, and thus different governments. Reading both of these and extensively comparing their arguments has allowed me to better understand these arguments individually. Through these multiple readings, in which I have done during the writing of my papers, I have learned a lot of details, and it has thus become easier for me to understand these two texts.
-Happy Thanksgiving