Politics, Philosophy and Economics 3 (2):143-159 (2004)

Abstract
In response to recent criticisms of traditional theories of political obligation, scholars have advanced moral reasons for complying with the law that focus on natural duties to assist other people who are in need. In discussions of political obligation, these ‘rescue principles’ are presented as alternatives to traditional principles. I argue that theories of political obligation based on rescue principles are not able to fulfill the role theorists assign them. If the underlying assumptions of rescue theories are uncovered, they can be seen also to support more traditional obligations to obey the law. Accordingly, rather than serving as alternatives to traditional principles, rescue principles can only supplement them. Key Words: political obligation • rescue • Copp.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1177/1470594X04042961
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: 64,046
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.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
78 ( #139,120 of 2,454,490 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #449,269 of 2,454,490 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes