Associative political obligations

Ethics 106 (2):247-273 (1996)

Authors
A. John Simmons
University of Virginia
Abstract
It is claimed by philosophers as diverse as Burke, Walzer, Dworkin, and MacIntyre that our political obligations are best understood as "associative" or "communal" obligations--that is, as obligations that require neither voluntary undertaking nor justification by "external" moral principles, but rather as "local" moral responsibilities whose normative weight derives entirely from their assignment by social practice. This paper identifies three primary lines of argument that appear to support such assertions: conceptual arguments, the arguments of nonvoluntarist contract theory, and communitarian arguments (which emphasize both an "identity thesis" and a "normative independence thesis"). However, each of these lines of argument fails to show that political obligations are associative obligations.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1086/233617
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 39,692
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Liberalism, Samaritanism, and Political Legitimacy.Christopher H. Wellman - 1996 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 25 (3):211-237.

View all 14 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
105 ( #67,897 of 2,327,796 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
5 ( #344,211 of 2,327,796 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature