Reported assembly scenes in Greek Tragedy

This paper presents a detailed consideration of the three democratic assembly meetings that are reported in Greek tragedy. The three scenes in their different ways reveal a preoccupation with a tension between elite rhetoric and popular wisdom in a democracy. Behind this preoccupation lies a shared assumption: that many people attended assemblies expecting their minds to be made up; and that persuasive oratory and the popular judgment of persuasive oratory could have a decisive influence on a vote.

The tragedy of non-ideal theory

This paper has three aims. First, it argues that the present use of ‘ideal theory’ is unhelpful, and that an earlier and apparently more natural use focusing on perfection would be preferable. Second, it has tried to show that revision of the use of the term would better expose two distinctive normative issues, and illustrated that claim by showing how some contributors to debates about ideal theory have gone wrong partly through not distinguishing them. Third, in exposing those two distinct normative issues, it has revealed a particular way in which ideal theory even under the more specific, revisionary definition will often be central to working out what to do in non-ideal circumstances. By clarifying the terms on which debates over ideal and non-ideal theory should take place, and highlighting the particular problems each deals with, it tries to clear the ground for turning to the actual problem, which is what to do in our non-ideal and often tragic circumstances.