Associative political obligations

Ethics 106 (2):247-273 (1996)
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
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history
Request removal from index
Download options
Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 26,213
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 11 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2009-01-28

Total downloads

88 ( #57,414 of 2,154,175 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

1 ( #397,226 of 2,154,175 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.

Other forums