This category needs an editor. We encourage you to help if you are qualified.
Volunteer, or read more about what this involves.
Related categories
Siblings:
50 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Order:
  1. Christopher Bertram, Justice and Property: On the Institutional Thesis Concerning Property.
    The institutional theory of property is that view that property rights are entirely and essentially conventional and are the creatures of states and coercively backed legal systems. In this paper, I argue that, although states and legal systems have a valuable role in defining property rights, the institutional story is not the whole story. Rather, the property rights hat we have reason to recognize as part of justice are partly conventional in character and partly rooted in universal human interests and (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  2. Paul Bowe (1978). Property Rights. Philosophical Studies 26:244-247.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  3. Joseph Boyle (2001). Fairness in Holdings: A Natural Law Account of Property and Welfare Rights. Social Philosophy and Policy 18 (1):206-226.
    In this essay I will try to develop a natural law justification of welfare rights. The justification I will undertake is from the perspective of Catholic natural law, that is, the strand of natural law that has been developed theoretically by Roman Catholic canonists, theologians, and philosophers since Aquinas, and affirmed by Catholic teachers as the basis for most moral obligations. Catholic natural law is, therefore, natural law as developed and understood by Catholics or others respecting Catholic traditions of inquiry. (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  4. Hugh Breakey (2011). Property, Persons, Boundaries: The Argument From Other-Ownership. Social Theory and Practice 37 (2):189-210.
    A question of interpersonal sovereignty dating back to the early modern era has resurfaced in contemporary political philosophy: viz. Should one individual have, prior to any consent, property rights in another person? Libertarians answer that they should not – and that this commitment requires us to reject all positive duties. Liberal-egalitarians largely agree with the libertarian’s answer to the question, but deny the corollary they draw from it, arguing instead that egalitarian regimes do not require other-ownership. Drawing on recent property (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  5. Hugh Breakey (2011). Two Concepts of Property: Ownership of Things and Property in Activities. Philosophical Forum 42 (3):239-265.
    I argue there is a distinct and integrated property-concept applying directly, not to things, but to actions. This concept of Property in Activities describes a determinate ethico-political relation to a particular activity – a relation that may (but equally may not) subsequently effect a wide variety of relations to some thing. The relation with the activity is fixed and primary, and any ensuing relations with things are variable and derivative. Property in Activities illuminates many of the vexing problem cases arising (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  6. Hugh Breakey (2010). Natural Intellectual Property Rights and the Public Domain. Modern Law Review 73 (2):208-239.
    No natural rights theory justifies strong intellectual property rights. More specifically, no theory within the entire domain of natural rights thinking – encompassing classical liberalism, libertarianism and left-libertarianism, in all their innumerable variants – coherently supports strengthening current intellectual property rights. Despite their many important differences, all these natural rights theories endorse some set of members of a common family of basic ethical precepts. These commitments include non-interference, fairness, non-worsening, consistency, universalisability, prior consent, self-ownership, self-governance, and the establishment of zones (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  7. Hugh Breakey (2010). User's Rights and the Public Domain. Intellectual Property Quarterly (3):312-23.
    In recent years the concept of “user’s rights” has gained considerable currency in discussions of the limits of intellectual property in general, and of copyright in particular. Those arguing in favour of the public domain and increased limitations on copyright have increasingly sought to fight fire with fire – to place substantive user’s rights against the claims of intellectual property. User’s rights have in some jurisdictions received explicit Supreme Court imprimatur and they are expressly recognised in key charters of human (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  8. David K. Chan (2005). Should Human Genes Be Patented? Philosophy in the Contemporary World 12 (2):30-36.
    The ethics of gene patenting is concerned with whether human genes are the kind of thing that is appropriate for patenting, and whether it is ethical to do so. Is genetic technology a special case compared to other medical technology that have been patented? Much of the debate has revolved around the benefits and harms of allowing gene sequences to be patented. In this paper, I am concerned with a non-consequential consideration: Can someone patent my genes? If genes are the (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  9. Melvin A. Davila Martinez, Rothbard on Natural Rights and Why Animals Lack Them.
    This paper examines Murray N. Rothbard's argument in "The 'Rights' of Animals," chapter 21 of The Ethics of Liberty.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  10. Simon Deakin, David Gindis, Geoffrey M. Hodgson, Kainan Huang & Katharina Pistor (forthcoming). Legal Institutionalism: Capitalism and the Constitutive Role of Law. Journal of Comparative Economics.
    Social scientists have paid insufficient attention to the role of law in constituting the economic institutions of capitalism. Part of this neglect emanates from inadequate conceptions of the nature of law itself. Spontaneous conceptions of law and property rights that downplay the role of the state are criticized here, because they typically assume relatively small numbers of agents and underplay the complexity and uncertainty in developed capitalist systems. In developed capitalist economies, law is sustained through interaction between private agents, courts (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  11. Simon Deakin, David Gindis, Geoffrey M. Hodgson, Kainan Huang & Katharina Pistor (forthcoming). Legal Institutionalism: Capitalism and the Constitutive Role of Law. Journal of Comparative Economics.
    Social scientists have paid insufficient attention to the role of law in constituting the economic institutions of capitalism. Part of this neglect emanates from inadequate conceptions of the nature of law itself. Spontaneous conceptions of law and property rights that downplay the role of the state are criticized here, because they typically assume relatively small numbers of agents and underplay the complexity and uncertainty in developed capitalist systems. In developed capitalist economies, law is sustained through interaction between private agents, courts (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  12. David M. Douglas (2011). A Bundle of Software Rights and Duties. Ethics and Information Technology 13 (3):185-197.
    Like the ownership of physical property, the issues computer software ownership raises can be understood as concerns over how various rights and duties over software are shared between owners and users. The powers of software owners are defined in software licenses, the legal agreements defining what users can and cannot do with a particular program. To help clarify how these licenses permit and restrict users’ actions, here I present a conceptual framework of software rights and duties that is inspired by (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (12 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  13. David M. Douglas (2011). The Social Disutility of Software Ownership. Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (3):485-502.
    Software ownership allows the owner to restrict the distribution of software and to prevent others from reading the software’s source code and building upon it. However, free software is released to users under software licenses that give them the right to read the source code, modify it, reuse it, and distribute the software to others. Proponents of free software such as Richard M. Stallman and Eben Moglen argue that the social disutility of software ownership is a sufficient justification for prohibiting (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  14. Speranta Dumitru (2008). Are Rawlsians Entitled to Monopoly Rights? In A. Gosseries, A. Marciano & A. Strowel (eds.), Intelectual Property and Theories of Justice. Palgrave-MacMilan
    Are intellectual property rights for talented people justified by Rawls’ criteria of justice? In this paper, I argue that Rawls’ theory of justice is ill-equipped to answer this question. Tailored for rival goods and, as a result, centred on the distribution of benefits, it tends to restate questions of justice about unequal rights as questions about economic inequalities. Therefore, it lacks the tools necessary to distinguish among different forms of incentives for talented people. Once social and economic inequalities observe equality (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  15. Danny Frederick (2015). Reply to Mark Friedman. Reason Papers 37 (1):85-87.
    I reply to Mark Friedman's response to my review of his book, 'Nozick's Libertarian Project.' I restate what I take to be the key mistakes in Friedman’s arguments for individual rights and the minimal state. I outline the explanation of the right to freedom in terms of the human capacity for critical rationality, and the explanation of the poliitcial authority of the state in rule-consequentialist terms which do not appeal to consent.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  16. Joseph S. Fulda (1998). A New Standard for Appropriation, with Some Remarks on Aggregation. Acm Sigcas Computers and Society 28 (4):6-11.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  17. John Hadley (2015). Animal Property Rights: A Theory of Habitat Rights for Wild Animals. Lexington Books.
    This book explores a theory of habitat rights for wild animals, positioning animal property rights within the existing institution of property and discussing the practical implications of giving property rights to animals.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  18. John Hadley (2005). Excluding Destruction. Philosophy in the Contemporary World 12 (2):22-29.
    In this paper I argue that the potentially environmentally destructive scope of a libertarian property rights regime can be narrowed by applying reasonable limits to those rights. I will claim that excluding the right to destroy from the libertarian property rights bundle is consistent with self-ownership and Robert Nozick’s interpretation of the Lockean proviso.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  19. John Hadley (2005). Nonhuman Animal Property: Reconciling Environmentalism and Animal Rights. Journal of Social Philosophy 36 (3):305–315.
    In this paper I extend liberal property rights theory to nonhuman animals.I sketch an outline of a nonhuman animal property rights regime and argue that both proponents of animal rights and ecological holism ought to accept nonhuman animal property rights. To conclude I address a series of objections.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  20. Donald C. Hubin (2012). Human Reproductive Interests: Puzzles at the Periphery of the Property Paradigm. Social Philosophy and Policy 29 (1):106-125.
    The question of ownershipis important in addressing many issues of public policy. But the attempt to subsume all questions of rights under what I describe as exerts a distorting influence on debates about a variety of complex moral issues. More specifically, I argue that the application of the property paradigm deformed discussion of the nature and basis of parental rights. The claim that parental rights are not best understood as property rights is now widely acknowledged. However, while the property paradigm (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  21. Peter Martin Jaworski (2011). The Metaphysics of Locke's Labour View. Locke Studies 11:73-106.
    This paper is an evaluation of John Locke's labour theory of property. Section I sets out Locke's labour view. Section II addresses several possible objections, including against the conceptual coherence of Locke's argument, against the metaphysical implications of his view, as well as foundational criticisms of the moral significance of labour and of my relations with objects that are grounded in labour under certain conditions and circumstances. I attempt to address each of these criticisms in a Lockian spirit, which will (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  22. Daniel Kofman (2012). La justification des droits juridictionnels. Philosophiques 39 (2):379-392.
    Daniel Kofman | : La littérature philosophique récente concernant les droits juridictionnels suppose qu’on puisse les justifier par une « théorie des droits territoriaux », sans faire appel à une théorie de l’autodétermination. Or les principes d’autodétermination des peuples devraient déterminer les principes des frontières juridictionnelles, et non le contraire. Les « droits territoriaux » sont essentiellement des droits de gouvernance, lesquels découlent eux-mêmes des principes d’autodétermination. Pour défendre ces thèses, je critique les arguments de Brilmayer, Simmons, et Stilz. | (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  23. Avery Kolers (2000). The Lockean Efficiency Argument and Aboriginal Land Rights. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 78 (3):391 – 404.
  24. Lawrence Lengbeyer (2005). Altering Artworks. Philosophy in the Contemporary World 12 (2):53-61.
    The grounds for recognizing that artists possess a personal “moral right of integrity” that would entitle them to prevent others from modifying their works are weak. There is, however, an important (and legislation-worthy) public interest in protecting highly-valued entities, including at least some works of art, from permanently destructive transformations.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  25. Annabelle Lever (2008). Is It Ethical To Patent Human Genes? In Gosseries Axel, Marciano A. & Strowel A. (eds.), Intellectual Property and Theories of Justice. Basingstoke & N.Y.: Palgrave Mcmillan 246--64.
    This paper examines the claims that moral objections to the patenting of human genes are misplaced and rest on confusions about what a patent is, or what is patented by a human gene patent. It shows that theese objections rest on too simple a conception of property rights, and the connections betwteen familiar moral objections to private property and moral objections to the patenting of human genes. Above all, the paper claims, objections to HGPs often reflect worries about the lack (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  26. Alejandra Mancilla (2016). Review Article: The Environmental Turn in Territorial Rights. [REVIEW] Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 19 (2):221-241.
    Recent theories of territorial rights could be characterized by their growing attention to environmental concerns and resource rights (understood as the rights of jurisdiction and/or ownership over natural resources). Here I examine two: Avery Kolers’s theory of ethnogeographical plenitude, and Cara Nine’s theory of legitimate political authority over people and resources. While Kolers is a pioneer in demanding ecological sustainability as a minimum requirement for any viable theory of territorial rights – building a bridge between environmental and political philosophy – (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  27. Alejandra Mancilla (2012). Samuel Pufendorf and the Right of Necessity. Aporia 3:47-64.
    From the end of the twelfth century until the middle of the eighteenth century, the concept of a right of necessity –i.e. the moral prerogative of an agent, given certain conditions, to use or take someone else’s property in order to get out of his plight– was common among moral and political philosophers, who took it to be a valid exception to the standard moral and legal rules. In this essay, I analyze Samuel Pufendorf’s account of such a right, founded (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  28. Nedim Nomer (2005). Fichte and the Idea of Liberal Socialism. Journal of Political Philosophy 13 (1):53–73.
  29. John Oberdiek (2008). Specifying Rights Out of Necessity. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 28 (1):19.
    It is the purpose of this article to make the positive case for an under-appreciated conception of rights: specified rights. In contrast to rights conceived generally, a specified right can stand against different behaviour in different circumstances, so that what conflicts with a right in one context may not conflict with it in another. The specified conception of rights thus combines into a single inquiry the two questions that must be answered in invoking the general conception of rights, identifying the (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  30. Steve Petersen, When You Can Keep It and Give It Away: The Ethics of Intellectual Property.
    What is “property”? Property Roughly, thing x is the (private) property of agent A if and only if A has exclusive and extensive legal rights of access and / or use for x.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  31. Matthieu Queloz (2016). The Double Nature of DNA: Reevaluating the Common Heritage Idea. Journal of Political Philosophy 24 (1):47-66.
    DNA possesses a double nature: it is both an analog chemical compound and a digital carrier of information. By distinguishing these two aspects, this paper aims to reevaluate the legally and politically influential idea that the human genome forms part of the common heritage of mankind, an idea which is thought to conflict with the practice of patenting DNA. The paper explores the lines of reasoning that lead to the common heritage idea, articulates and motivates what emerges as the most (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  32. Merten Reglitz (2016). A Kantian Argument Against World Poverty. European Journal of Political Theory:1-19.
    Immanuel Kant is recognized as one of the first philosophers who wrote systematically about global justice and world peace. In the current debate on global justice he is mostly appealed to by critics of extensive duties of global justice. However, I show in this paper that an analysis of Kant’s late work on rights and justice provides ample resources for disagreeing with those who take Kant to call for only modest changes in global politics. Kant’s comments in the Doctrine of (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  33. John T. Sanders (2002). Projects and Property. In David Schmidtz (ed.), Robert Nozick. Cambridge University Press
    I try in this essay to accomplish two things. First I offer some first thoughts toward a clarification of the ethical foundations of private property rights that avoids pitfalls common to more strictly Lockean theories, and is thus better prepared to address arguments posed by critics of standard private property arrangements. Second, I'll address one critical argument that has become pretty common over the years. While versions of the argument can be traced back at least to Pierre Joseph Proudhon, I'll (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  34. Lorenzo Sleakes, The Natural Rights of Ownership.
    Derivation of natural property rights from self ownership. Arrives at a left libertarian philosophy with special insights into money, legitimate taxation and finance inspired by Henry George and Silvio Gesell.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  35. Cristian Timmermann & Zoë Robaey (2016). Agrobiodiversität, das Gemeinschaftserbe-Prinzip und Marktanreize. In Barbara Brandl & Stephan Schleissing (eds.), Biopatente – Saatgut als Ware und als öffentliches Gut. Nomos 109-131.
    Die Diversität von Nahrungspflanzen, ein Ergebnis Jahrtausende langer Zuchtbemühungen, ist in den letzten Jahrzehnten dramatisch zurückgegangen. Schätzungen zufolge machen von den über 7000 Nahrungspflanzenarten ganze 103 Sorten 90% der Nahrungsmittelproduktion aus. Dieser Verlust könnte in Zukunft gewaltige negative Auswirkungen auf die Nahrungsmittelsicherheit haben, da die Biodiversität eine zentrale Rolle bei der Absorbierung biotischer und abiotischer Stressfaktoren spielt, die auf die Pflanzen wirken. Darüber hinaus stellt der Verlust eine bedeutende Verarmung nicht nur des Pools genetischer Ressourcen dar, die zukünftigen Generationen zur (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  36. Cristian Timmermann & Zoë Robaey (2016). Agrobiodiversity Under Different Property Regimes. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 29 (2):285-303.
    Having an adequate and extensively recognized resource governance system is essential for the conservation and sustainable use of crop genetic resources in a highly populated planet. Despite the widely accepted importance of agrobiodiversity for future plant breeding and thus food security, there is still pervasive disagreement at the individual level on who should own genetic resources. The aim of the article is to provide conceptual clarification on the following concepts and their relation to agrobiodiversity stewardship: open access, commons, private property, (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  37. Terrance Tomkow, The Retributive Theory of Property.
  38. Mariusz Turowski (2015). Specters and Possession of Neoliberal Democracy: Contemporary Critical Political Philosophies and the Legacy of C.B. Macpherson. In A. K. Çüçen & M. Becermen (eds.), Gelenek, Demokrasi ve Felsefe /Tradition, Democracy, and Philosophy. Uludağ Üniversitesi 318-326.
    The paper is a part of the project of retrieving C.B. Macpherson’s thesis of possessive individualism and his contribution to investigations about democratic theory and the “Western political ontology” valuable especially in today’s context of expansion, crisis and – arguably – subsequent, experienced today, revival of the project of “neoliberal democracy”. The aim of my paper is to present theory of possessive individualism as the missing center of critical theory of democracy. The task is conducted through a brief reconstruction of (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  39. Mariusz Turowski (2015). Specters and Possession of Neoliberal Democracy: Contemporary Critical Political Philosophies and the Legacy of C.B. Macpherson. In A. K. Çüçen & M. Becermen (eds.), Gelenek, Demokrasi ve Felsefe /Tradition, Democracy, and Philosophy. Uludağ Üniversitesi 318-326.
    The paper is a part of the project of retrieving C.B. Macpherson’s thesis of possessive individualism and his contribution to investigations about democratic theory and the “Western political ontology” valuable especially in today’s context of expansion, crisis and – arguably – subsequent, experienced today, revival of the project of “neoliberal democracy”. The aim of my paper is to present theory of possessive individualism as the missing center of critical theory of democracy. The task is conducted through a brief reconstruction of (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  40. Mariusz Turowski (2015). Specters and Possession of Neoliberal Democracy: Contemporary Critical Political Philosophies and the Legacy of C.B. Macpherson. In A. K. Çüçen & M. Becermen (eds.), Gelenek, Demokrasi ve Felsefe /Tradition, Democracy, and Philosophy. Uludağ Üniversitesi 318-326.
    The paper is a part of the project of retrieving C.B. Macpherson’s thesis of possessive individualism and his contribution to investigations about democratic theory and the “Western political ontology” valuable especially in today’s context of expansion, crisis and – arguably – subsequent, experienced today, revival of the project of “neoliberal democracy”. The aim of my paper is to present theory of possessive individualism as the missing center of critical theory of democracy. The task is conducted through a brief reconstruction of (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  41. Mariusz Turowski (2015). Specters and Possession of Neoliberal Democracy: Contemporary Critical Political Philosophies and the Legacy of C.B. Macpherson. In A. K. Çüçen & M. Becermen (eds.), Gelenek, Demokrasi ve Felsefe /Tradition, Democracy, and Philosophy. Uludağ Üniversitesi 318-326.
    The paper is a part of the project of retrieving C.B. Macpherson’s thesis of possessive individualism and his contribution to investigations about democratic theory and the “Western political ontology” valuable especially in today’s context of expansion, crisis and – arguably – subsequent, experienced today, revival of the project of “neoliberal democracy”. The aim of my paper is to present theory of possessive individualism as the missing center of critical theory of democracy. The task is conducted through a brief reconstruction of (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  42. Mariusz Turowski (2015). Specters and Possession of Neoliberal Democracy: Contemporary Critical Political Philosophies and the Legacy of C.B. Macpherson. In A. K. Çüçen & M. Becermen (eds.), Gelenek, Demokrasi ve Felsefe /Tradition, Democracy, and Philosophy. Uludağ Üniversitesi 318-326.
    The paper is a part of the project of retrieving C.B. Macpherson’s thesis of possessive individualism and his contribution to investigations about democratic theory and the “Western political ontology” valuable especially in today’s context of expansion, crisis and – arguably – subsequent, experienced today, revival of the project of “neoliberal democracy”. The aim of my paper is to present theory of possessive individualism as the missing center of critical theory of democracy. The task is conducted through a brief reconstruction of (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  43. Mariusz Turowski (2015). Specters and Possession of Neoliberal Democracy: Contemporary Critical Political Philosophies and the Legacy of C.B. Macpherson. In A. K. Çüçen & M. Becermen (eds.), Gelenek, Demokrasi ve Felsefe /Tradition, Democracy, and Philosophy. Uludağ Üniversitesi 318-326.
    The paper is a part of the project of retrieving C.B. Macpherson’s thesis of possessive individualism and his contribution to investigations about democratic theory and the “Western political ontology” valuable especially in today’s context of expansion, crisis and – arguably – subsequent, experienced today, revival of the project of “neoliberal democracy”. The aim of my paper is to present theory of possessive individualism as the missing center of critical theory of democracy. The task is conducted through a brief reconstruction of (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  44. Mariusz Turowski (2015). Specters and Possession of Neoliberal Democracy: Contemporary Critical Political Philosophies and the Legacy of C.B. Macpherson. In A. K. Çüçen & M. Becermen (eds.), Gelenek, Demokrasi ve Felsefe /Tradition, Democracy, and Philosophy. Uludağ Üniversitesi 318-326.
    The paper is a part of the project of retrieving C.B. Macpherson’s thesis of possessive individualism and his contribution to investigations about democratic theory and the “Western political ontology” valuable especially in today’s context of expansion, crisis and – arguably – subsequent, experienced today, revival of the project of “neoliberal democracy”. The aim of my paper is to present theory of possessive individualism as the missing center of critical theory of democracy. The task is conducted through a brief reconstruction of (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  45. Mariusz Turowski (2015). Specters and Possession of Neoliberal Democracy: Contemporary Critical Political Philosophies and the Legacy of C.B. Macpherson. In A. K. Çüçen & M. Becermen (eds.), Gelenek, Demokrasi ve Felsefe /Tradition, Democracy, and Philosophy. Uludağ Üniversitesi 318-326.
    The paper is a part of the project of retrieving C.B. Macpherson’s thesis of possessive individualism and his contribution to investigations about democratic theory and the “Western political ontology” valuable especially in today’s context of expansion, crisis and – arguably – subsequent, experienced today, revival of the project of “neoliberal democracy”. The aim of my paper is to present theory of possessive individualism as the missing center of critical theory of democracy. The task is conducted through a brief reconstruction of (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  46. Bas van der Vossen (2009). What Counts as Original Appropriation? Politics, Philosophy and Economics 8 (4):355-373.
    I here defend historical entitlement theories of property rights against a popular charge. This is the objection that such theories fail because no convincing account of original appropriation exists. I argue that this argument assumes a certain reading of historical entitlement theory and I spell out an alternative reading against which it misfires. On this reading, the role of acts of original appropriation is not to justify but to individuate people’s holdings. I argue that we can identify which acts count (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  47. David Wiens (forthcoming). Leif Wenar, Blood Oil. [REVIEW] Ethics.
  48. David Wiens (2015). Natural Resources and Government Responsiveness. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 14 (1):84-105.
    Pogge and Wenar have recently argued that we are responsible for the persistence of the so-called ‘resource curse’. But their analyses are limited in important ways. I trace these limitations to their undue focus on the ways in which the international rules governing resource transactions undermine government accountability. To overcome the shortcomings of Pogge’s and Wenar’s analyses, I propose a normative framework organized around the social value of government responsiveness and discuss the implications of adopting this framework for future normative (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  49. Tomasz Żuradzki (2008). Własność jako konwencja. Diametros 15:102-110.
    Recenzja książki: Liam Murphy, Thomas Nagel, The Myth of Ownership. Taxes and Justice, Oxford University Press, Oxford – New York 2002.
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  50. Tomasz Żuradzki (2007). Własność to złudzenie. Rzeczpospolita 12 (19).
    Własność prywatna nie jest żadnym naturalnym uprawnieniem, ale prawną konwencją zdefiniowaną przez system podatkowy. Stopień ingerencji w rzekomo naturalne prawo własności nie może być podstawą oceniania systemów podatkowych, bo sama własność jest wytworem takich systemów. Podatki nie odbierają nam własności, tylko umożliwiają jej istnienie.
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography