In Malcolm Murray (ed.), Liberty, Games, and Contracts: Jan Narveson and the Defence of Libertarianism. Ashgate (2007)
|Abstract||In The Libertarian Idea, Jan Narveson explains his interpretation of social contract theory this way: "The general idea of this theory is that the principles of morality are (or should be) those principles for directing everyone's conduct which it is reasonable for everyone to accept. They are the rules that everyone has good reason for wanting everyone to act on, and thus to internalize in himself or herself, and thus to reinforce in the case of everyone." It is plain, here, that Narveson believes that social contract is to provide justification -- a foundation, in fact -- for 'the principles of morality'. The burden assumed in this essay is to examine how far Narveson has succeeded in making this foundational claim plausible.|
|Keywords||Narveson social contract libertarianism|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|External links||This entry has no external links. Add one.|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Don Herzog (1990). Gimme That Old‐Time Religion. Critical Review 4 (1-2):74-85.
Pablo Gilabert (2006). Basic Positive Duties of Justice and Narveson's Libertarian Challenge. Southern Journal of Philosophy 44 (2):193-216.
Paul F. Hodapp (1990). Can There Be a Social Contract with Business? Journal of Business Ethics 9 (2):127 - 131.
Malcolm Murray (ed.) (2007). Liberty, Games And Contracts: Jan Narveson And The Defense Of Libertarianism. Ashgate.
Kimberly K. Smith (2008). Animals and the Social Contract. Environmental Ethics 30 (2):195-207.
Jeffery A. Thompson & David W. Hart (2005). Psychological Contracts. Proceedings of the International Association for Business and Society 16:38-43.
Jeffery A. Thompson & David W. Hart (2006). Psychological Contracts: A Nano-Level Perspective on Social Contract Theory. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 68 (3):229 - 241.
Gerald Gaus (2009). Recognized Rights as Devices of Public Reason. Philosophical Perspectives 23 (1):111-136.
Jan Narveson (1994). The Agreement to Keep Our Agreements: Hume, Prichard, and Searle. Philosophical Papers 23 (2):75-87.
Robert Bass (2000). Pure Contractarianism: Promise, Problems, Prospects. [REVIEW] Journal of Value Inquiry 34 (2-3):319-332.
Duncan MacIntosh (2007). Who Owns Me: Me Or My Mother? How To Escape Okin's Problem For Nozick's And Narveson's Theory Of Entitlement. In Malcolm Murray (ed.), Liberty, Games And Contracts: Jan Narveson And The Defense Of Libertarianism. Ashgate.
Ben Wempe (2008). Four Design Criteria for Any Future Contractarian Theory of Business Ethics. Journal of Business Ethics 81 (3):697 - 714.
John Rawls (1999). The Law of Peoples. Harvard University Press.
Henry S. Richardson (2006). Rawlsian Social-Contract Theory and the Severely Disabled. Journal of Ethics 10 (4):419 - 462.
Added to index2012-10-13
Total downloads27 ( #51,640 of 722,787 )
Recent downloads (6 months)13 ( #9,259 of 722,787 )
How can I increase my downloads?