The classical model of democracy that Schumpeter criticizes is manufactured out of a variety of earlier ideas, not those of any one thinker or even one school of thought. His critique of the central ideals by which he defines the model--those of the common will and the common good--remains persuasive. People's preferences are too messy and too manipulable to allow us to think that mass democracy can promote those ideals, as he defines them. Should we endorse his purely electoral model (...) of democracy then, and accept that people do not exercise any control over government? Not necessarily. We can expand democracy to include the constitutional and contestatory constraints that people impose on their rulers. We may hope that people can rely on such democratic controls to ensure that government operates by community standards. (shrink)

La pensée politique de Philip Pettit incarne aujourd'hui une école "républicaine", qui tente de trouver une troisième voie entre le libéralisme de John Rawis et ses critiques communautariens comme Charles Taylor. Mais le républicanisme de Pettit ne peut se comprendre sans prendre en compte l'autre versant de ses travaux, qui poilent sur les fondements de l'économie et des sciences sociales. Sans paradoxe, il se qualifie lui-même "d'individualiste poliste". Le coeur de sa pensée tient dans cette articulation originale. dont les (...) conséquences politiques tonnent une théorie républicaine de la liberté et de la démocratie. Les hommes ne peuvent penser que les uns avec les autres, en commun. II faut donc briser le tabou moderne selon lequel toutes les valeurs politiques doivent pouvoir être traduites en termes individualistes. Si l'homme n'est homme que parce qu'il pense et échange avec ses semblables, les valeurs politiques doivent être représentées comme des valeurs sociales. A l'opposé de tout atomisme. Pettit développe ainsi une métaphysique sociale "holiste". Mais ces valeurs ne peuvent pour autant s'imposer aux individus. Quoique nous fassions ensemble, il faut que chacun puisse y donner son consentement, car chaque personne doit être considérée comme un être moral indépendant et d'égale valeur. (shrink)

This volume documents the 16th Münster Lectures in Philosophy and examines five themes that are prominent in the work of philosopher and political theorist Philip Pettit. These themes are: Epistemology and Semantics, Philosophy of Mind, Consequentialism, Group Agency, and Republicanism. The book provides insight into Pettit's work and demonstrates the central role his work plays in a number of contemporary philosophical debates. Pettit’s contributions to the philosophy of mind and action, rational choice theory, the philosophy of the social sciences, (...) as well as metaethics, normative ethics and political philosophy are main points of reference, and have advanced ongoing and initiated new discussions. The book shows that a striking feature of Pettit's work has been the depth of his analyses and arguments regarding individual topics – ranging from rule-following to free will, from group agency to social ontology and the methodology of the social sciences, from a defense of consequentialism to the revival of the republican tradition in the theory of democracy and to value theory, but also their systematic overall coherence. The book contains Pettit’s lecture "Freedom and Other Robustly Demanding Goods", nine critical papers on Pettit’s philosophy, and a reply article entitled "Self-Defense on Five Fronts: A Reply to My Commentators". (shrink)

El neorepublicanismo comprende un amplio espectro de enfoques y concepciones en constante evolución. Para caracterizarlo podemos focalizarnos en una concepción o teoría y adoptarla como punto de referencia para luego indagar sobre las diferencias específicas de cada enfoque. Así, si quisiéramos caracterizar el liberalismo igualitario lo haríamos adoptando como punto de referencia la teoría de la justicia rawlsiana para luego avanzar sobre los debates subsecuentes que dialogan con aquella. Del mismo modo, para caracterizar al neorepublicanismo, haríamos bien en introducirnos a (...) él a través de la teoría republicana de Philip Pettit. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:The State by Philip PETTITSteven B. SmithPETTIT, Philip. The State. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2023. 376 pp. Cloth, $39.95The dust-jacket of this book announces a bold claim: “The future of our species depends on the state.” Ever since the Treaty of Westphalia, the state has been regarded as the basic unit of political legitimacy, and yet the state has never ceased to have its critics. (...) From the left, the state has been regarded as failing to realize a normatively appealing ideal of justice that, it is believed, can be achieved only in some form of post-sovereign organization. From the right, the state has been seen as an agent of collectivization that threatens individual liberty and the right to property. Philip Pettit hopes to deflect both of these [End Page 159] complaints in his defense of the state as the indispensable political institution.This is a big and complex book that defies easy summary. Its core attempts to define the nature and limits of the “modern state” even if the term modern and how this differs from other alternative forms of political association is never explored. On Pettit’s realist account, the state will acquire legitimacy, not by holding it to rigorous standards of justice, but if it is able to achieve a rough balance of power between rulers and ruled. This standard does not require equality between the rulers and the ruled or even among the ruled themselves, but it does presuppose the value of stability that is a necessary requisite for any desirable polity. Pettit is, after all, the author of a book on Hobbes, and The State may be seen as an attempt to adapt and update Leviathan.Like Hobbes, Pettit insists that the attainment of political order is a precondition for any possibility of justice. Reversing Rawls’s famous dictum, it is order, not justice, that is the first virtue of social institutions. The author insists that the “functional polity” may fall well short of absolute justice, but this is because the state is related to justice in the way that prudence is related to morality. I wish this point had been more fully developed. It suggests a sphere of political ethics that stands somewhere between Machiavellian power politics and Kantian ideal theory. It suggests that politics requires a degree of prudential flexibility and latitude that cannot be reduced to norms or laws. But how prudence is related to justice, Pettit tantalizingly holds open for another book.The state that Pettit endorses sounds above all like the modern liberal state. The state will serve its ends when it provides for the rule of law that gives each citizen the freedom to act with impunity under legal protection. Sounding like Montesquieu’s famous definition of liberty as “that tranquility of spirit which comes from the opinion each one has of his security,” Pettit suggests that “the fully functional state should give each citizen a reliable, determinate zone of legal security, however limited it may be, within which they can decide on how they want to live their lives.” Isaiah Berlin could not have said it better.The book is divided into two large sections. The first deals with what might be called the metatheory of the state focusing on the rule of law, individual and corporate agency, and a theory of “decentralized” sovereignty. The second part deals with the functions of the state proper. These include the collective power of the people to challenge the sovereign—the best part of the book in my opinion—a defense of individual rights, and the ability of the state to intervene in the economy. Each of these claims, I expect, will give rise to heated debate, but I cannot develop them here.One of the more striking claims of Pettit’s book is the statement that “there has been little work on the theory of the state in the sense in which we pursue it here.” Much may hinge on the meaning of that last phrase, but as for the first part of the sentence, it is literally head scratching. Pettit acknowledges the importance of Bodin, Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and [End... (shrink)

In this article I explore two aspects of Pettit's thesis about Hobbes' innovation with regard to the transformative and central role of language in thought and politics. First, I argue that while Hobbes had many debts to both traditionalists and innovators, he did break new ground in characterising language as in some ways constitutive of thought - a conclusion he came to as a consequence not only of his extreme nominalism, but also of his views on the exceptional sensibility of (...) words. Second, I argue that while language is part of a matrix of the forces which shape politics, it plays a powerful and indispensable part in both saving and cursing society. (shrink)

This is a short review of List and Pettit's influential book 'Group Agency'.

Segundo uma célebre tese defendida por Philip Pettit, um agente é livre conquanto cada uma de suas ações seja não somente acessível, mas também não-dominada, no sentido de que ninguém tenha o poder de bloquear o acesso a tais ações. Através de contraexemplos, esse artigo procura demonstrar que a vontade de eliminar a dominação pode diminuir antes que reforçar a liberdade individual.

In Just Freedom, Pettit presents a powerful new statement and defense of the traditional “republican” conception of liberty or freedom. And he claims that freedom can serve as an ecumenical value with broad appeal, which we can put at the basis of a distinctively republican theory of justice. That is, Pettit argues that this “conception of freedom as non-domination allows us to see all issues of justice as issues, ultimately, of what freedom demands.” It is not, however, clear that liberty (...) is the only value that Pettit (a) actually appeals to and (b) should be appealing to. He seems to be as much a defender of relational equality and legal dignity as he is a defender of liberty. And he must either (it seems) make the implausible claim that the basic requirements of justice only apply to able-minded adults, or else admit that justice at bottom consists in something wider than just securing liberty as non-domination for all able-minded adults. For by his own admission, Pettit’s theory of justice as republican freedom “ignores issues of justice in relation to children and the intellectually disabled.” It would be better to say, therefore, that the promotion of freedom as non-domination constitutes one, but not the only, requirement of justice. (shrink)

O presente artigo visa discutir a proximidade entre as concepções políticas de liberdade de John Rawls e Philip Pettit, e o arranjo político democrático que delas deriva. A primeira delas, de matriz teórica liberal, entende a liberdade como o primeiro dos princípios a ser realizado, anterior aos demais numa ordem lexical. Ela significa uma proteção, viabilizada pelo Estado, contra interferências alheias à vontade do agente em sua conduta. Já a última, de cunho republicano, consiste num status social de não (...) dominação, isto é, um estado perene de segurança contra intervenção arbitrária no agir do sujeito. Percebe-se, de antemão, a significativa similaridade entre os dois conceitos apresentados. Para além da semelhança óbvia, pretendemos construir uma sistemática de paralelismos e conexões que permita a compreensão de uma semiequivalência entre as teses dos dois autores, com algumas dessemelhanças a serem notadas, mas cujos projetos são mutuamente compatíveis. (shrink)

Readers familiar with Philip Pettit’s work will not be surprised to find that The Birth of Ethics is at once very ambitious – offering nothing less than a basis for a complete naturalistic reconstr...

Nas últimas décadas, o republicanismo voltou a ocupar um espaço relevante no debate político contemporâneo. No processo de retomada do pensamento republicano, observada principalmente na obra de Philip Pettit, um dos aspectos mais inovadores é a proposta de uma forma de governo capaz de efetivar o ideal de liberdade como ausência de dominação, denominada de democracia contestatória. O objetivo deste artigo é apresentar e discutir o modelo de democracia contestatória proposto por Pettit.

El republicanismo, tanto como el liberalismo y el comunitarismo, comprende un amplio espectro de enfoques y concepciones en constante evolución. Por lo que al referirnos a estas corrientes teóricas decidimos adoptar algunas teorías o enfoques como puntos de referencia para luego indagar sobre las diferencias específicas de cada enfoque y sus respectivos debates internos. Así, si quisiéramos presentar el liberalismo igualitario lo haríamos a través del estudio de la teoría de la justicia rawlsiana y los debates subsecuentes que la toman (...) como referencia. Del mismo modo, si quisiéramos averiguar qué propone el neorepublicanismo, haríamos bien en acercarnos a él a través de la teoría republicana de Philip Pettit. (shrink)