Politics, Philosophy and Economics 10 (3):301-322 (2011)
|Abstract||Republican freedom is freedom from domination juxtaposed to negative freedom as freedom from interference. Proponents argue that republican freedom is superior since it highlights that individuals lose freedoms even when they are not subject to interference, and claim republican freedom is more ‘resilient’. Republican freedom is trivalent, that is, it includes the idea that someone might be non-free to perform some actions rather than unfree, and in that sense everyone regards republican freedom as different from negative freedom. Trivalence makes republican freedom moralized according to negative libertarians. Beyond that, negative libertarians argue that all the supposed advantages of republican freedom are compatible with those of pure negative-freedom measures. That is, losses and gains of republican freedom are captured in measures of pure negative freedom, and any protection for republican freedom also protects negative freedom, ensuring each is equally resilient. Since republican freedom has no advantages over negative freedom, but has other problems (is moralized and is trivalent), negative freedom is superior. I examine this debate in this article through the ‘coalition problem’ for republican freedom. The coalition problem is that since there is always a coalition of others who could dominate any agent in any sphere, all agents are subject to domination, and hence no one can ever have republican freedom. Pettit’s simple solution to this reductio ad absurdum distinguishes potential from actual coalitions. Individuals are only dominated by actual coalitions, and not by potential ones. The simple solution highlights moralization problems as it demonstrates that domination cannot be purely institutionally defined, but requires consideration of dispositions and expectations about others’ behaviour. I argue that the differences between the ‘free man’ and ‘unfree person’ paradigmatic to republican arguments is best captured not by the difference between domination and interference, but, rather, from familiar distinctions between different types of rights and freedoms. Resilience is a practical matter that might track some of these familiar distinctions|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Fabian Wendt (2011). Slaves, Prisoners, and Republican Freedom. Res Publica 17 (2):175-192.
Boudewijn de Bruin (2008). A Note on List's Modal Logic of Republican Freedom. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 7 (3):341-349.
Boudewijn de Bruin (2009). Liberal and Republican Freedom. Journal of Political Philosophy 17 (4):418-439.
Christian List (2006). Republican Freedom and the Rule of Law. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 5 (2):201-220.
M. J. Thompson (2013). Reconstructing Republican Freedom: A Critique of the Neo-Republican Concept of Freedom as Non-Domination. Philosophy and Social Criticism 39 (3):277-298.
Christian List (2004). The Impossibility of a Paretian Republican? Some Comments on Pettit and Sen. Economics and Philosophy 20 (1):65-87.
Philip Pettit (2002). Keeping Republican Freedom Simple: On a Difference with Quentin Skinner. Political Theory 30 (3):339-356.
Robert B. Talisse (2012). Impunity and Domination: A Puzzle for Republicanism. European Journal of Political Theory:1474885112463657.
Alex Sager (forthcoming). Political Rights, Republican Freedom, and Temporary Workers. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy:1-23.
Charles Larmore (2003). Liberal and Republican Conceptions of Freedom. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 6 (1):96-119.
Philip Pettit (2003). Discourse Theory and Republican Freedom. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 6 (1):72-95.
Kyle Swan (2012). Republican Equality. Social Theory and Practice 38 (3):432-454.
Eva Erman (2011). Freedom as Non-Domination or How to Throw the Agent Out of the Space of Reasons. Journal of Power 3 (1).
Lubomira Radoilska (2009). Public Health Ethics and Liberalism. Public Health Ethics 2 (2):135-145.
M. D. Harbour (2012). Non-Domination and Pure Negative Liberty. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 11 (2):186-205.
Added to index2011-02-11
Total downloads21 ( #65,382 of 722,932 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,087 of 722,932 )
How can I increase my downloads?