Abstract
Unger has written a thoughtful but problematic study of the shortcomings of liberal political theory. The specific method of the critique is his own, but it is well-structured and readable. The problem is that the precise nature of the "liberal psychology" and "liberal political theory" under attack is never very clear. This lack of clarity stands in marked contrast to the general tone of the work. One can assume with some justification that the author sees the classic core of the liberal doctrine "in the work of Thomas Hobbes, of his contemporaries, and of his successors...." Nevertheless, the doctrine addressed by the author appears to be of much wider scope; Hobbes, Locke, Hume, Spinoza, Rousseau, and Kant are all called in "to illustrate rather than to prove their adherence to the doctrines that are the subject of the critique." It is with reservations concerning the subject under attack that one must approach this study.