In closing of this argument he believes that Locke relates to points three, four, and five of the outlined in the previous paragraph. The Two Treatises endures for social reason rather than intellectual.
The third part of the article deals with political theory and the advantages of studying past thinkers. He uses the approach that all political theory thinking is an inherited tradition. One great point he touches on is that the past shapes the present and that studying ideas in order, you learn that ideas that now seem implausible were once accepted. Bringing some knowledge of social and historical events is a very good first step in a subject. The framework of the past becomes a harder form of knowledge that helps us as thinkers but should be used with an enormous amount of caution.
In his conclusion he states that he tried to indicate both the merits of the history of political thought and the manner in which you should approach it. Modern organizational theory should not be taken as an alternative form of study but to emphasize advantages from the historical approach. A major alternative to political theory is organized around concepts rather than thinkers. Rather than study the thinkers views, study the concepts in further understanding the topic. The nonhistorical approach tends to deify the conclusions of one moment; it takes the ideas out of a wider context from which they were once held. It seems to present thoughts as dead rather than alive. He wants you to take politics as a practical activity and then as an object of study. He argued that political theory should be studied in a historical and social context, and that should also be applied to political institutions. .
I truly enjoyed reviewing this article. Michael Levin real touched on some good points. I believe that the five criteria for which a great book would be justified as a classic are exact. The quality of the philosophy and originality of content are the two most important points.