Graduate studies at Western
Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 100 (2):159–173 (2000)
|Abstract||There is an argument that government cannot be good for individuals because it causes them to act through fear of punishment, hence for nonmoral reasons. The obvious responses of accepting the conclusion (anarchism) and denying the premiss about moral motivation (utilitarianism) are first considered. Then the strategy of accepting the premiss but denying the conclusion is pursued at greater length. Some arguments of T. H. Green and B. Bosanquet which attempt to do this are considered before an independent resolution is proposed|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Re'em Segev (2001). Freedom of Expression Against Governmental Authorities. Israel Democracy Institute.
Michael Devaney (2004). Government Subsidized Academic Research: Economic and Ethical Conflicts. [REVIEW] Journal of Academic Ethics 2 (3):273-285.
George Heffernan (1987). From “Pure Democracy” to 'Pure Republic'. Philosophy Research Archives 13:1-62.
Justin Weinberg (2011). Is Government Supererogation Possible? Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 92 (2):263-281.
Tyler Cowen & Gregory Kavka (2003). The Public Goods Rationale for Government and the Circularity Problem. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 2 (2):265-277.
Brian Barry (2002). Capitalists Rule Ok? Some Puzzles About Power. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 1 (2):155-184.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads9 ( #122,865 of 757,546 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,433 of 757,546 )
How can I increase my downloads?