Ethics 121 (2):335-53 (2011)

Authors
William A. Edmundson
Georgia State University
Abstract
Consent theories of political obligation draw upon the unique powers consent exhibits in everyday dealings, but they are frustrated by the "problem of massive nonconsent." Expansions of what is counted as consent, such as tacit or hypothetical consent, have seemed untrue to the core concept of giving willing consent. David Estlund proposes a novel conception, "normative consent," to address the problem of massive nonconsent while being true to "the idiom of consent." This comment details consent’s virtues and shows that consent theories cannot claim enough of them to vindicate political obligation.
Keywords political obligation  consent  Estlund  political authority
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1086/658143
Options
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: 70,039
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Against Normative Consent.Nicolas Frank - 2016 - Journal of Social Philosophy 47 (4):470-487.
A Study on the Justification of Political Obligation: Focussed on the Classification of the Theories. 조일수 - 2012 - Journal of Ethics: The Korean Association of Ethics 1 (87):93-117.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP index
2011-06-01

Total views
183 ( #63,970 of 2,505,764 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #416,705 of 2,505,764 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes