Legal Theory 14 (3):193–217 (2008)

In this article I criticize a theory of political obligation recently put forward by Christopher Wellman. Wellman's “samaritan theory” grounds both state legitimacy and political obligation in a natural duty to help people in need when this can be done at no unreasonable cost. I argue that this view is not able to account for some important features of the relation between state and citizens that Wellman himself seems to value. My conclusion is that the samaritan theory can only be accepted if we are ready to give up either the traditional notion of political obligation as a prima facie duty valid for every citizen, or the current view of the relationships that should exist between states, citizens and foreigners (the view according to which states should have special concerns for their own citizens).
Keywords Political Obligation  Legitimacy  Samaritanism  Particularity  Global Justice  Partiality  Christopher H. Wellman  Fair-play
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1017/s1352325208080087
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 71,316
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Samaritanism and Civil Disobedience.Candice Delmas - 2014 - Res Publica 20 (3):295-313.
Associative Responsibilities and Political Obligation.Massimo Renzo - 2012 - Philosophical Quarterly 62 (246):106-127.
VII-GoodSamaritans andGoodGovernment.Dudley Knowles - 2012 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 112 (2pt2):161-178.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles


Added to PP index

Total views
119 ( #99,585 of 2,519,317 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #271,748 of 2,519,317 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes