In the introductory pages of Political Philosophy, Beiner lays out his template for political philosophy. Political philosophers participate in an ongoing dialogue about “rival conceptions of the good” (xvi). “If we do not at least aspire to a theory that presents itself as more rationally compelling than all alternative views, it is hard to see how we can do theory at all” (xxvii). Because Beiner holds this view that a political philosopher aims for a comprehensive picture, he spends a lot of time in these first pages explaining why Isaiah Berlin cannot count as a political philosopher (because Berlin refuses to judge among competing conceptions of the good). A second prologue Beiner devotes to considerations on Freud and Weber. He calls them “epic” theorists (xxix), but they are more than epic: they are tragic. It is in these pages—of prologue no. 2—that we get the keenest insight into what Beiner really thinks political philosophy is. Freud is an Enlightenment rationalist but at the same time a “deep and uncompromising pessimist.” Weber appeals to Beiner because he held that one needs as a scholar “the courage to make up [one's] mind about [one's] ultimate standpoint” (xlix), even while acknowledging that we live in a “brutally disenchanted world” (l). Resolution in the face of tragedy is the core of political philosophy for Beiner.