Module finder

This module is designed to explore in detail the key areas of feminism, postcolonial theory, and cultural semiotics i.e. the analysis of cultural signs, whether in visual culture, such as advertising, political culture, or based in cultural practices. The module focuses on core ideas about misogyny, discrimination, the psychology of colonialism, and cultural consumption.
We will focus on selections from major texts which have been foundational in the study of culture, resistance, and domination. These texs are available in English allowing students with no prior knowledge of French or Francophone contexts to engage with the module.

The module involves audio-lectures, which include trigger questions, and independent study. Students are expected to carry out some reading in advance of listening to each session, in order to make the most of the sessions.

The module involves audio-lectures, which include trigger questions, and independent study. Students are expected to carry out some reading in advance of listening to each session, in order to make the most of the sessions.

The module involves audio-lectures, which include trigger questions, and independent study. Students are expected to carry out some reading in advance of listening to each session, in order to make the most of the sessions.

The module involves audio-lectures, which include trigger questions, and independent study. Students are expected to carry out some reading in advance of listening to each session, in order to make the most of the sessions.

The framing of this module is that Machiavelli has seriously misled modern political thinking by permitting a wedge to be driven between morality and politics. Even if that was not Machiavelli’s intention, that has been the consequence of his ideas. Thus, this module can be approached as an extended criticism and response to Machiavellianism in political thought and in politics. We will recover a lost way of thinking that does not drive a wedge between morality and politics. This recovery will show us a more subtle way of thinking about morality and politics in order to understand that this earlier tradition of thought has more depth and rings more true with regard to our own moral convictions. However, the purpose is not primarily about beating up Machiavelli, enjoyable though that is; our primary purpose is to think more deeply about actual political problems that challenge our own moral beliefs. Our primary texts come from the ancient Greeks and the focus is on the ethical use of political power – whether that is possible and what it would like like in practice. Who should take this module? It should appeal to those who think Machiavelli was right, but who are not afraid to have their convictions challenged. It should appeal to those who disagree with Machiavelli and are looking for penetrating arguments to use against him. It should appeal to those who observe contemporary politics and are alarmed that we are seeing blatant dishonesty, torture, arms sales to oppressive regimes, and a host of other behaviours that we feel are deeply wrong. After a brief recap of Machiavelli to set the stage, we will dive in to an analysis of those thinkers who defined the tradition of Western political thought before Machiavelli, Plato and Aristotle. Through them we will find a richer and more profound – and more applicable to our world – understanding of the conflict between morality and politics, more profound than any modern thought infected with Machiavelli’s ideas. This module will actively undermine cynical, realist thinking about politics that becomes a lazy excuse for not asking ethical questions of our politicians or ourselves.

The framing of this module is that Machiavelli has seriously misled modern political thinking by permitting a wedge to be driven between morality and politics. Even if that was not Machiavelli’s intention, that has been the consequence of his ideas. Thus, this module can be approached as an extended criticism and response to Machiavellianism in political thought and in politics. We will recover a lost way of thinking that does not drive a wedge between morality and politics. This recovery will show us a more subtle way of thinking about morality and politics in order to understand that this earlier tradition of thought has more depth and rings more true with regard to our own moral convictions. However, the purpose is not primarily about beating up Machiavelli, enjoyable though that is; our primary purpose is to think more deeply about actual political problems that challenge our own moral beliefs. Our primary texts come from the ancient Greeks and the focus is on the ethical use of political power – whether that is possible and what it would like like in practice. Who should take this module? It should appeal to those who think Machiavelli was right, but who are not afraid to have their convictions challenged. It should appeal to those who disagree with Machiavelli and are looking for penetrating arguments to use against him. It should appeal to those who observe contemporary politics and are alarmed that we are seeing blatant dishonesty, torture, arms sales to oppressive regimes, and a host of other behaviours that we feel are deeply wrong. After a brief recap of Machiavelli to set the stage, we will dive in to an analysis of those thinkers who defined the tradition of Western political thought before Machiavelli, Plato and Aristotle. Through them we will find a richer and more profound – and more applicable to our world – understanding of the conflict between morality and politics, more profound than any modern thought infected with Machiavelli’s ideas. This module will actively undermine cynical, realist thinking about politics that becomes a lazy excuse for not asking ethical questions of our politicians or ourselves.

The framing of this module is that Machiavelli has seriously misled modern political thinking by permitting a wedge to be driven between morality and politics. Even if that was not Machiavelli’s intention, that has been the consequence of his ideas. Thus, this module can be approached as an extended criticism and response to Machiavellianism in political thought and in politics. We will recover a lost way of thinking that does not drive a wedge between morality and politics. This recovery will show us a more subtle way of thinking about morality and politics in order to understand that this earlier tradition of thought has more depth and rings more true with regard to our own moral convictions. However, the purpose is not primarily about beating up Machiavelli, enjoyable though that is; our primary purpose is to think more deeply about actual political problems that challenge our own moral beliefs. Our primary texts come from the ancient Greeks and the focus is on the ethical use of political power – whether that is possible and what it would like like in practice. Who should take this module? It should appeal to those who think Machiavelli was right, but who are not afraid to have their convictions challenged. It should appeal to those who disagree with Machiavelli and are looking for penetrating arguments to use against him. It should appeal to those who observe contemporary politics and are alarmed that we are seeing blatant dishonesty, torture, arms sales to oppressive regimes, and a host of other behaviours that we feel are deeply wrong. After a brief recap of Machiavelli to set the stage, we will dive in to an analysis of those thinkers who defined the tradition of Western political thought before Machiavelli, Plato and Aristotle. Through them we will find a richer and more profound – and more applicable to our world – understanding of the conflict between morality and politics, more profound than any modern thought infected with Machiavelli’s ideas. This module will actively undermine cynical, realist thinking about politics that becomes a lazy excuse for not asking ethical questions of our politicians or ourselves.

The framing of this module is that Machiavelli has seriously misled modern political thinking by permitting a wedge to be driven between morality and politics. Even if that was not Machiavelli’s intention, that has been the consequence of his ideas. Thus, this module can be approached as an extended criticism and response to Machiavellianism in political thought and in politics. We will recover a lost way of thinking that does not drive a wedge between morality and politics. This recovery will show us a more subtle way of thinking about morality and politics in order to understand that this earlier tradition of thought has more depth and rings more true with regard to our own moral convictions. However, the purpose is not primarily about beating up Machiavelli, enjoyable though that is; our primary purpose is to think more deeply about actual political problems that challenge our own moral beliefs. Our primary texts come from the ancient Greeks and the focus is on the ethical use of political power – whether that is possible and what it would like like in practice. Who should take this module? It should appeal to those who think Machiavelli was right, but who are not afraid to have their convictions challenged. It should appeal to those who disagree with Machiavelli and are looking for penetrating arguments to use against him. It should appeal to those who observe contemporary politics and are alarmed that we are seeing blatant dishonesty, torture, arms sales to oppressive regimes, and a host of other behaviours that we feel are deeply wrong. After a brief recap of Machiavelli to set the stage, we will dive in to an analysis of those thinkers who defined the tradition of Western political thought before Machiavelli, Plato and Aristotle. Through them we will find a richer and more profound – and more applicable to our world – understanding of the conflict between morality and politics, more profound than any modern thought infected with Machiavelli’s ideas. This module will actively undermine cynical, realist thinking about politics that becomes a lazy excuse for not asking ethical questions of our politicians or ourselves.

The framing of this module is that Machiavelli has seriously misled modern political thinking by permitting a wedge to be driven between morality and politics. Even if that was not Machiavelli’s intention, that has been the consequence of his ideas. Thus, this module can be approached as an extended criticism and response to Machiavellianism in political thought and in politics. We will recover a lost way of thinking that does not drive a wedge between morality and politics. This recovery will show us a more subtle way of thinking about morality and politics in order to understand that this earlier tradition of thought has more depth and rings more true with regard to our own moral convictions. However, the purpose is not primarily about beating up Machiavelli, enjoyable though that is; our primary purpose is to think more deeply about actual political problems that challenge our own moral beliefs. Our primary texts come from the ancient Greeks and the focus is on the ethical use of political power – whether that is possible and what it would like like in practice. Who should take this module? It should appeal to those who think Machiavelli was right, but who are not afraid to have their convictions challenged. It should appeal to those who disagree with Machiavelli and are looking for penetrating arguments to use against him. It should appeal to those who observe contemporary politics and are alarmed that we are seeing blatant dishonesty, torture, arms sales to oppressive regimes, and a host of other behaviours that we feel are deeply wrong. After a brief recap of Machiavelli to set the stage, we will dive in to an analysis of those thinkers who defined the tradition of Western political thought before Machiavelli, Plato and Aristotle. Through them we will find a richer and more profound – and more applicable to our world – understanding of the conflict between morality and politics, more profound than any modern thought infected with Machiavelli’s ideas. This module will actively undermine cynical, realist thinking about politics that becomes a lazy excuse for not asking ethical questions of our politicians or ourselves.