CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Ruth Abbey

political theorist

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionJul 26, 2026
Entity authorityQ7382846 ↗
Source-derived summary

Ruth Abbey (born 1961) is an Australian political theorist with interests in contemporary political theory, history of political thought, history of philosophy, and feminist political thought.

She was a John Cardinal O'Hara, C.S.C. Associate Professor in the Department of Political Science of the University of Notre Dame.

Work

Feminist liberalism

In The Return of Feminist Liberalism, Abbey examines a number of contemporary feminists who, notwithstanding decades of feminist critique, are unwilling to give up on liberalism. Her examination centres on the work of Martha Nussbaum, the late Susan Moller Okin (1946–2004) and the late Jean Hampton (1954–1996) all of whom situate themselves within the liberal tradition and outline well developed positions on the compatibility of feminism and liberalism.

Abbey examines why, and in what ways, each of them believes that liberalism contains the normative and political resources for the continuing improvement of women's situations. She asks whether they are cognizant of, and can reply to, the major criticisms of liberalism mounted by many feminists. Abbey also brings out and tries to explain and evaluate the differences among these three feminist-liberals, despite their shared allegiance to this tradition. Okin, Nussbaum and Hampton do not, however, represent a minority of three in their faith in liberalism, so in addition Abbey surveys the arguments made by other contemporary feminists who see some ongoing value in liberalism, eliciting both the promise they see for women in some of liberalism's ideas as well as demonstrating how liberalism itself can be made more robust by attending to women's concerns.

Nietzsche

At the core of Abbey's writings about Friedrich Nietzsche is a study of his middle period works, Human, All Too Human, Daybreak, and The Gay Science. Her analysis provides insights on Nietzsche's morality touching on issues such as friendship, gender, marriage, egoism, pity and politics.

Editorial summary

This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Ruth Abbey” as political theorist. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.

Editorial reviewA concise reference frame for defining the subject, testing terminology and identifying the institution closest to the evidence. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1961, 1946, 2004, 1954—that can be checked directly. The linked authority record independently contributes the date 1961-04-12. The account is most persuasive where Ruth, Abbey and political can be independently traced.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The subject matters to the general reference register because the source frames it as political theorist. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.

Evidence profile

The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jul 26, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q7382846. VIAF identifies the subject as 117245952. The Library of Congress control number is n99274991. 3 of 3 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 1961, 1946, 2004 and 1954.

Critical limits

A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Ruth Abbey”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Ruth Abbey primary sources, Ruth Abbey archive and Ruth research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Ruth Abbey”?
  2. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
  3. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Ruth Abbey” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.