David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Politics, Philosophy and Economics 3 (3):337-364 (2004)
Left-libertarian theories of justice hold that agents are full self-owners and that natural resources are owned in some egalitarian manner. Some philosophers find left-libertarianism promising because it seems that it coherently underwrites both some demands of material equality and some limits on the permissible means of promoting such equality. However, the main goal of this article is to argue that, as far as coherence is concerned, at least one formulation of left-libertarianism is in trouble. This formulation is that of Michael Otsuka, who published it first in a 1998 article, and now in his thought-provoking book Libertarianism Without Inequality . In a nutshell, my objection is that the set of reasons that support egalitarian ownership of natural resources as Otsuka understands it stand in a deep tension with the set of reasons that would prompt one to endorse Otsukas right to self-ownership. In light of their underlying commitments, a defender of either of the views that left-libertarianism combines would actually have to reject the other. This incoherence, it seems, can only be remedied either by an approach that renders left-libertarianism incomplete in a way that can only be fixed by endorsing more commitments than most left-libertarians would want to or by an approach that leaves left-libertarianism a philosophically shallow theory. Key Words: equality left-libertarianism libertarianism original appropriation property self-ownership.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Mathias Risse (2009). Common Ownership of the Earth as a Non-Parochial Standpoint: A Contingent Derivation of Human Rights. European Journal of Philosophy 17 (2):277-304.
Peter Dietsch (2008). L'interprétation du principe de la propriété de soi au sein du libertarisme de gauche. Dialogue 47 (01):65-.
Similar books and articles
Richard J. Arneson (2010). Self-Ownership and World Ownership: Against Left-Libertarianism. Social Philosophy and Policy 27 (1):168-194.
Peter Vallentyne (2000). Left-Libertarianism: A Primer. In Peter Vallentyne & Hillel Steiner (eds.), Left Libertarianism and Its Critics: The Contemporary Debate. Palgrave Publishers Ltd..
Michael Otsuka, Peter Vallentyne & Hillel Steiner (2005). Why Left-Libertarianism Is Not Incoherent, Indeterminate, or Irrelevant: A Reply to Fried. Philosophy and Public Affairs 33 (2):201-215.
Peter Vallentyne, Hillel Steiner & Michael Otsuka (2009). Left-Libertarianism and Liberty Forthcoming in Debates in Political Philosophy. In Thomas Christiano & John Christman (eds.), Debates in Political Philosophy. Blackwell Publishers.
Peter Vallentyne (2006). Left-Libertarianism and Private Discrimination. San Diego Law Review 43:981-994.
Michael Otsuka (2005). Libertarianism Without Inequality. Oxford University Press.
Peter Vallentyne (2001). Left-Libertarianism and Global Justice. In Burton M. Leiser & Tom Campbell (eds.), Human Rights in Philosophy & Practice. Ashgate Publishing.
Peter Vallentyne, Hillel Steiner & And Michael Otsuka (2005). Why Left-Libertarianism is Not Incoherent, Indeterminate, or Irrelevant: A Reply to Fried. Philosophy and Public Affairs 33 (2):201–215.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads49 ( #34,092 of 1,102,926 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #183,068 of 1,102,926 )
How can I increase my downloads?