This article focuses on the ‘Bosanquet-Hobhouse controversy’ and defends Bosanquet's political philosophy against Hobhouse's criticisms. A thorough textual investigation of The Philosophical Theory of the State (supported by references to the Gifford Lectures) demonstrates what Bosanquet actually wrote and rectifies Hobhouse's erroneous account of Bosanquet's philosophy. My analysis of the principles of self-transcendence and of the dialectic of the finite-infinite clarifies the nature and content of the logico-metaphysical assumptions underlying Bosanquet's philosophical theory of the state. I show that Hobhouse misunderstood, misinterpreted and misrepresented Bosanquet's views. I elucidate Bosanquet's definition of the state, and suggest that his views should be understood in the conceptual context of philosophical Idealism. This article defends Bosanquet's idea of the state as the instantiation of ethical life, and explores the logical interdependence between self-transcendence and the attainment of the best life in the context of the state.

British Idealism was the dominant philosophy in Britain and the entire Englishspeaking world during the last decades of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century. ) were some of the most famous exponents of the British Idealist movement. The philosophical writings of the British Idealists do not represent a monolithic set of doctrines; on the contrary, one can discern continuity, differentiation and development within the British Idealist intellectual tradition.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract