South African Journal of Philosophy 23 (3):282-291 (2004)
AbstractIn this paper I offer a limited defence of “fairness” or “fair play” arguments for political obligation by focussing on one important critique of such arguments, that offered by A. John Simmons. I isolate Simmons's concentration on the idea of “accepting” benefits and argue that, among other difficulties, his criteria for when we can be said to accept a benefit from our political communities are too restrictive. While the scope of the discussion is narrow, I try to sketch ways in which the failings of Simmons's critique are symptomatic of deeper problems with his libertarian approach. S. Afr. J. Philos. Vol.23(3) 2004: 282-291
Similar books and articles
Fairness, Political Obligation, and the Justificatory Gap.Jiafeng Zhu - 2014 - Journal of Moral Philosophy (4):1-23.
The Particularities of Legitimacy: John Simmons on Political Obligation.Kevin Walton - 2013 - Ratio Juris 26 (1):1-15.
Fairness, self-deception and political obligation.Massimo Renzo - 2014 - Philosophical Studies 169 (3):467-488.
What is political about political obligation? A neglected lesson from consent theory.Dorota Mokrosińska - 2013 - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 16 (1):88-108.
Fair Play: Resolving the Crito - Apology Problem.Jonathan Hecht - 2011 - History of Political Thought 32 (4):543-564.
Political obligation and military service in three countries.George Klosko, Michael Keren & Stacy Nyikos - 2003 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 2 (1):37-62.
The natural basis of political obligation.George Klosko - 2001 - Social Philosophy and Policy 18 (1):93-114.
Rawls and "Duty-Based" Accounts of Political Obligation.Simon Cushing - 1999 - APA Newsletter on Law and Philosophy 99 (1):67-71.
Rethinking Political Obligation: Moral Principles, Communal Ties, Citizenship.Dorota Mokrosinska - 2012 - Palgrave-Macmillan.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads