200 found
Sort by:
  1. Jan Narveson, Is Government a Mistake? Exploring the Anarchist Option.
    Bastiat's great contribution to economics, in his own view, was his identification of service as the source of economic value. What is anything worth to anybody? In the cases where we are not dealing with what our fellow men do for us, the answer is to be found in its utility - how much the thing contributes to our satisfaction. In the case where we deal with our fellows, we are interested specifically in what they can do for us, that (...)
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Jan Narveson & James P. Sterba (unknown). Are Liberty and Equality Compatible? Cambridge University Press.
    Are the political ideals of liberty and equality compatible? This question is of central and continuing importance in political philosophy, moral philosophy, and welfare economics. In this book, two distinguished philosophers take up the debate. Jan Narveson argues that a political ideal of negative liberty is incompatible with any substantive idealof equality, while James P. Sterba argues that Narveson's own ideal of negative liberty is compatible, and in fact leads to the requirements of a substantive ideal of equality. Of course, (...)
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. J. Narveson (forthcoming). Оverpopulation? Тhere is No Inherent Limits to Growth. Free Inquiry.
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Jan Narveson (forthcoming). Have We A Right to Non-Discrimination? Business Ethics in Canada, Scarborough: Prentice-Hall Canada.
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Jan Narveson (2014). Comment on Levy's ‘Forced to Be Free?: Increasing Patient Autonomy by Constraining It’. Journal of Medical Ethics 40 (5):302-303.
    The general thrust of Neil Levy's paper is that a certain amount of paternalism should be viewed as compatible with liberalism.1 I am not quite convinced that what he is defending is properly paternalism. In addition, I am not entirely sure what his proposal is. Here are a few comments about several points in the paper.1. A possibly small question is worth raising when Levy says, ‘That is, the state may not interfere with individuals’ actions, even to promote their own (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Jan Narveson (2014). Reiman on Labor, Value, and the Difference Principle. Journal of Ethics 18 (1):47-74.
    In As Free and as Just as Possible: The Theory of Marxian Liberalism, Jeffrey Reiman proposes to develop a theory of “Marxian Liberalism.” ‘Liberalism’ here is defined by the principle that “sane adult human beings should be free in the sense of free from coercion that would block their ability to act on the choices they make.” While the idea of coercion could use some glossing, it is not obvious that poverty, unemployment, racism, and sexism are as such coercive. In (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Jan Narveson (2013). Liberty, Property, and Welfare Rights: Brettschneider's Argument. Libertarian Papers 5.
    Brettschneider argues that the granting of property rights to all entails a right of exclusion by acquirer/owners against all others, that this exclusionary right entails a loss on their part, and that to make up for this, property owners owe any nonowners welfare rights. Against this, I argue that exclusion is not in fact a cost. Everyone is to have liberty rights, which are negative: what people are excluded from is the liberty to attack and despoil others. Everyone, whether an (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Jan Narveson (2013). On Defense by Nuclear Deterrence. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 16 (sup1):195-211.
    (1986). On Defense by Nuclear Deterrence. Canadian Journal of Philosophy: Vol. 16, Supplementary Volume 12: Nuclear Weapons, Deterrence and Disarmament, pp. 195-211.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Jan Narveson (2013). Pacifism—Fifty Years Later. Philosophia 41 (4):925-943.
    I suppose I’m writing this because of my 1965 paper on Pacifism. In that essay I argued that pacifism is self-contradictory. That’s a strong charge, and also not entirely clear. Let’s start by trying to clarify the charge and related ones.Pacifism has traditionally been understood as total opposition to violence, even the use of it in defense of oneself when under attack. I earlier maintained (in my well-known “Pacifism: A Philosophical Analysis” (Narveson, Ethics, 75:4, 259–271, 1965)) that this position is (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. J. Narveson (2012). The Medical Minimum: Zero. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 36 (6):558-571.
    The question is what the mandated medical minimum for all should be. The correct answer is zero. That is to say, the government should not be forcing anyone to pay for anyone. The most popular arguments within the liberal framework, presumed to be shared by all, are briefly surveyed. Health care is provided by someone to someone else, and that someone else should either be paying for it, or recognize that someone is providing it charitably to him or her. Compelling (...)
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Jan Narveson (2012). Book Reviews Tomasi , John . Free Market Fairness . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2012. Pp. Xxvii+348. $35.00 (Cloth). [REVIEW] Ethics 123 (1):188-192.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Jan Narveson (2012). Puzzle, ILN I.2: A Solution. Informal Logic 34 (1).
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Jan Narveson (2011). Discussion of Helga Varden's Review and Alistair MacLeod's Comments. Social Philosophy Today 27:179-196.
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Jan Narveson (2011). Response. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 25 (2):259-272.
    Gibbard accuses me of having an “extreme” view of property rights, even though he agrees that liberty is a good thing. But is it good enough to justify excluding handouts to the poor? He thinks not. I argue that the “social contract” idea of justice, which he in general shares, would underwrite the sort of strong property rights I plump for—noting that voluntary assistance to the poor (or anyone) is, after all, not only perfectly acceptable but much to be commended. (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Jan Narveson (2011). Response to Christman. Journal of Social Philosophy 42 (4):428-440.
  16. Jan Narveson & James P. Sterba (2011). Introduction. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 25 (2):233-235.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Jan Narveson & James P. Sterba (2011). Précis of Are Liberty and Equality Compatible? Social Philosophy Today 27:141-146.
  18. Jan Narveson (2010). Cohens Rescue. Journal of Ethics 14 (3-4):263-334.
    G. A. Cohen's Rescuing Justice and Equality proposes that both concepts need rescuing from the work of John Rawls. Especially, it is concerned with Rawls' famous second principle of justice according to which social primary goods should be distributed equally unless an unequal distribution is to the benefit of the worst off. The question is why this would ever be necessary if all parties are just. Cohen and I agree that Rawls cannot really justify inequalities on the basis given. But (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Jan Narveson (2010). Property and Rights. Social Philosophy and Policy 27 (1):101-134.
    I present what I take to be the approach to property rights, in which property is basically a unitary concept: owners are the ones with the right to do, and prohibit others from doing, whatever there is to do with the thing owned, within the limits imposed by the rights of others to their things. I expound and defend the idea of in more or less Lockean mode. I also point to the many difficulties of application of the general idea, (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Jan Narveson (2010). The Relevance of Decision Theory to Ethical Theory. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 13 (5):497-520.
    Morality for the purposes of this paper consists of sets of rules or principles intended for the general regulation of conduct for all. Intuitionist accounts of morality are rejected as making reasoned analysis of morals impossible. In many interactions, there is partial conflict and partial cooperation. From the general social point of view, the rational thing to propose is that we steer clear of conflict and promote cooperation. This is what it is rational to propose to reinforce, and to assist (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Jan Narveson (2009). Discussion: Must We Choose Between Chandran Kukathas's "Two Constructions of Libertarianism"? Libertarian Papers 1.
    Kukathas, in “Two Constructions of Libertarianism,” concludes that “the choice confronting libertarians is an invidious one. … The Federation of Liberty can, in principle, turn out to contain no communities of that federation which actually value or respect liberty; and even slavery might have a lawful place within it. The Union of Liberty, on the other hand, can, in principle turn out to be society ruled by a strong authority with little respect for dissenting moral traditions, including some self-styled libertarian (...)
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Jan Narveson (2009). Internal/External. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 23 (1):125-132.
    Where does domestic policy leave off and foreign policy begin? I point out that many domestic policies have major repercussions forother countries, some of them of a kind that are conducive to violence if not outright warfare. My examples are the drug laws, which create huge incentives for foreign criminals as well as domestic ones; concerns about “global warming” which are likely to impoverish many poor countries or prevent them from advancing; and the penchant for extensive government intervention in the (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Jan Narveson (2009). Overpopulation? No Way! Free Inquiry 29:40-41.
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Jan Narveson (2009). Present Payments, Past Wrongs: Correcting Loose Talk About Nozick and Rectification. Libertarian Papers 1.
    It is widely thought that Robert Nozick’s views on rectification of past injustices are of critical importance to his theory of distributive justice, even perhaps justifying wholesale redistributive taxes in the present because of the undoubted injustices that have pervaded much past history. This essay undertakes to correct this impression—not mostly by disagreeing with Nozick’s claims, but nevertheless proceeding on basic libertarian theory. Of enormous importance is the role of putative innocents, who are defrauded by miscreants carefully covering their tracks (...)
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Jan Narveson (2009). Rawls's Social Contract: Not Really. In Shaun Young (ed.), Reflections on Rawls: An Assessment of His Legacy. Ashgate. 91.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Jan Narveson (2009). When, If Ever, Do We Aggregate? And Why? Social Philosophy and Policy 26 (1):48-75.
    Aggregation in moral philosophy calls for the summing or averaging of values or utilities as a guide to individual behavior. But morality, it is argued, needs to be individualistic, in view of the evident separateness of persons, especially given the great disparities among individuals who nevertheless interact with each other in social life. The most plausible general moral program is the classical liberal (or ) one calling for mutual noninterference rather than treating others as equal to oneself in point of (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Jan Narveson (2008). Hudson, William E. The Libertarian Illusion. Washington: CQ Press, 2008. [REVIEW] Reason Papers 30:113-120.
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Jan Narveson (2008). Racism, “Ismism,” and Globalism. Social Philosophy Today 24:27-38.
    ‘Racism’ has become the name of something we are all against. But what exactly is it, and why are we against it? This general account proposes that in many cases and contexts, the making of racial (and other) distinctions in such a way as to give some kind of preference to members of one such group among others is quite acceptable. When isn’t it, then? The answer proposed here is that it’s unacceptable when the kind of behavior done to some (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Jan Narveson (2008). You and the State: A Short Introduction to Political Philosophy. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
    This unusual introduction to political philosophy draws on its history and main theories_classic liberal, democratic, socialist, radical_with an eye to how each sees the place of the individual in the political order.
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Jan Narveson (2006). Justice in Health Care. Journal of Value Inquiry 40 (2-3):371-384.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. J. Narveson (2005). Comment on Colin Williams's Arguments Against Spooner. Journal of Libertarian Studies 19 (3):95.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Jan Narveson (2005). Is World Poverty a Moral Problem for the Wealthy? Journal of Ethics 8 (4):397 - 408.
    This article discusses the question of poverty and wealth in light of several theses put forward by Larry Temkin. The claim that there is a sort of cosmic injustice involved when great disparities of ability or of wealth are found. He is concerned especially about disparities that are undeserved. It is agreed that this is unfortunate, but not agreed that they are unjust in a sense that supports the imposition of rectification on anyone else. Nor is poverty typically undeserved in (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. Jan Narveson (2005). Welfare and Wealth, Poverty and Justice in Today's World. Journal of Ethics 8 (4):305 - 348.
    This article argues that there is no sound basis for thinking that we have a general and strong duty to rectify disparities of wealth around the world, apart from the special case where some become wealthy by theft or fraud. The nearest thing we have to a rational morality for all has to be built on the interests of all, and they include substantial freedoms, but not substantial entitlements to others assistance. It is also pointed out that the situation of (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. G. E. Moore, Gregory Kavka, Hannah Arendt, Jan Narveson & John Rawls (2004). Key Word Index Volume 8. Journal of Ethics 8 (4):475-476.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Jan Narveson (2004). Serena Olsaretti, Ed., Desert and Justice:Desert and Justice. Ethics 115 (1):151-157.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Jan Narveson (2004). Maxificing: Life on a Budget; or, If You Would Maximize, Then Satisfice! In Michael Byron (ed.), Satisficing and Maximizing: Moral Theorists on Practical Reason. Cambridge University Press. 59--70.
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Jan Narveson (2004). Overpopulation? Fiddlesticks! Free Inquiry 24.
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. Jan Narveson (2004). Welfare, Happiness, and Ethics. International Studies in Philosophy 36 (1):316-318.
  39. J. Narveson (2003). Pacifism and Terrorism: Why We Should Condemn Both. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 17 (2).
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. Jan Narveson (2003). God by Design? In Neil A. Manson (ed.), God and Design: The Teleological Argument and Modern Science. Routledge. 80--88.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. Jan Narveson (2003). Minarchism. Etica E Politica 5 (2):1-14.
    This essay addresses the on-going controversy between supporters of minimal government, or minarchists, and supporters of no government, or anarchists. Both lay claim to the Libertarian principle, which holds that the only justification for the use of force is to deal with aggressive force initiated by someone else. Both agree that force is justified in dealing with aggressors. The only question is, who wields it, and how? The essay explains, briefly, the role of private property in all this. Private property (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. Jan Narveson (2003). Professor Heath's Canada. Dialogue 42 (02):363-.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. Jan Narveson (2003). Political Platonism, Liberalism, and Democracy. Journal of Social Philosophy 34 (1):153–168.
  44. Jan Narveson (2003). Terrorism and Pacifism. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 17 (2):157-172.
    Pacifism and terrorism are at opposite ends of one spectrum: pacifists have too many friends; terrorists have too many enemies. The indiscriminacy robs both of any credibility. Both fail to distinguish between aggressors and their victims. Discussion of terrorism, however, is complicated by insufficient attention to the distinction between noncombatants and innocents. Just War theory relies heavily on that distinction, providing protections to noncombatants as such, without going into the further question of innocence. Terrorism thus violates the restrictions on justice (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Jan Narveson (2003). The "Invisible Hand". Journal of Business Ethics 46 (3):201 - 212.
    The argument of the "Invisible Hand" is that the system of free enterprise benefits society in general even though it is not the aim of any particular economic agent to do that. This article proposes an analysis of why this is so. The key is that the morality of the market forbids only force and fraud; it does not require people to do good to others. Nevertheless, when all transactions are voluntary to both parties, that is exactly what we can (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. Jan Narveson (2003). We Don't Owe Them a Thing! The Monist 86 (3):419-433.
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. Jan Narveson (2002). Collective Responsibility. Journal of Ethics 6 (2):179-198.
    The basic bearer of responsibility is individuals, because that isall there are – nothing else can literally be the bearer of fullresponsibility. Claims about group responsibility therefore needanalysis. This would be impossible if all actions must be understoodas ones that could be performed whether or not anyone else exists.Individuals often act by virtue of membership in certain groups;often such membership bears a causal role in our behavior, andsometimes people act deliberately in order to promote the prospectsof members of a given (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. Jan Narveson (2002). Kerrey and Calley. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 16 (2):153-162.
    In the Vietnam war, Lieutenant Calley, claiming to be following orders, ordered the killing of several hundred women, children, and elderly people in the village of My Lai. In 1969, Lieutenant (later Senator) Kerrey led a small group of SEALs in the dead of night on a dangerous military venture. In course, a dozen or so innocent villagers were either shot in crossfire or killed intentionally because there seemed a real chance that they would inform the enemy, endangering themselves and (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. Jan Narveson (2002). Respecting Persons in Theory and Practice: Essays on Moral and Political Philosophy. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
    Respecting Persons in Theory and Practice is a collection of essays of the moral and political philosophy of Jan Narveson. The essays in this collection share a consistent theme running through much of Narveson's moral and political philosophy, namely that politics and morals stem from the interests of individual people, and have no antecedent authority over us. The essays in this collection, in various ways and as applied to various aspects of the scene, argue that the ultimate and true point (...)
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. Jan Narveson Narveson (2002). AIDS in the Third World: How, If at All, Do We Help? [REVIEW] Health Care Analysis 10 (1):109-120.
    The duty to help our fellows is not the same,and not stringent in the same way as thefamiliar duties to refrain from violence toothers, and to be honest. In general, beinghelpful to others is commendable, and to beheld up as a virtue. Only in cases wherereciprocity is possible and likely may we speakof anything stronger along this line. Moreover,the case of AIDS in Africa is furthercomplicated by the fact that it is easilypreventable by readily understandable behavioralterations. However, there are certainpossible (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 200