author beliefs

Question 1

hart

Answer 1

• separation thesis between law and morality
• believes that the legal system is not the gunman situation writ large
• immoral laws are still laws if they follow structural requirements to get there
• lacks ‘fidelity to law’; upholding and respecting the legal system and its laws and principles
• rule of recognition

Question 2

rawls

Answer 2

• definition and distinctions of civil disobedience
• 2 principles, 2 conditions for one of them
• justification
• role

Question 3

arendt

Answer 3

• civil disobedience forming on public opinion, and when people lose faith in legal system
• civil disobedience as a driver of change
• justification of civil disobedience; right to associate
• lobbyists of the people
• good man vs good citizen
• critique of rawls

Question 4

king

Answer 4

• ‘wait’ means ‘never’ (300 years), so should act on immoral laws immediately
• civil disobedience being a 4 step process
• last resort
• created by the legal system and not civil disobedients
• civil disobedience permitted when violating human’s rights
• law is good when it does not violate one’s rights (moral view)
• should accept punishment so those who witness recognize its immorality
• what makes laws unjust

Question 5

delmas

Answer 5

• should civil disobedience be punished?
• non-evasion
• reversal of normative starting point

Question 6

fuller

Answer 6

• 8 principles; consistency, congruence, prospectivity, publicity, generality, possibility of compliance, stability, clarity
• law and morality cannot be separated; internal morality of law required
• law is good when it follows these principles (structural view)
• grudge informer case

Question 7

how does delmas say civil disobedience should be punished

Answer 7

allowing civil disobedience can lead to open lawlessness

Question 8

how does delmas say civil disobedience should not be punished

Answer 8

can be a stabilizing force by giving people a nonviolent way to express disagreement, and punishment may just reverse and alienate people further

Question 9

delmas normative starting point

Answer 9

essentially that the burden is on the state to justify unjust laws, not on people to justify breaking them. Delmas says that if you try to avoid the consequences of protesting (evasion) then it’s not really civil disobedience

Question 10

king’s 4 step process of civil disobedience

Answer 10

fact finding, negotiation, self-purification, and then direct action

Question 11

rawls two principles

Answer 11

The principle of fairness
The principle of justice

Question 12

rawls principle of fairness

Answer 12

justified political obligation; the moral duty to obey the rules of just institutions.

Question 13

rawls principle of justice

Answer 13

• concerns equal basic liberties; everyone has an equal right to all basic liberties (ex. Freedom of speech),
• social and economic inequalities, ; must follow 2 criteria;
  fair equality of opportunity
  difference principle

Question 14

rawls fair equality of opportunity

Answer 14

fair equality of opportunity that everyone must have genuine opportunities to access same opportunities

Question 15

rawls difference principle

Answer 15

which contends that inequalities must benefit the least advantaged in society the most.

Question 16

hart gunman situation writ large

Answer 16

if a person was to believe the legal system is the gunman situation writ large, they are ignoring the situation in which we are obeying the gunman simply because we are afraid of the consequences, and not because we feel a prima facie obligation to obey him,
Therefore, hart says we respect law in a way we don’t respect a gunman; law has a kind of authority that goes beyond power and fear, it has legitimacy.

Question 17

hart prima facie obligation

Answer 17

we should obey unless we have a strong reason not to, because we see it as a set of rules we participate in and not just threats.

Question 18

fidelity to law

Answer 18

upholding and respecting the legal system and its laws and principles

Question 19

arendt civil disobedience as a driver of change

Answer 19

She says that ,legal systems tend to be conservative, protecting the status quo, so when people act outside of the law, the pave the way for change

Question 20

arendt comparison of civil disobedients to “lobbyists of the people”

Answer 20

they are organized, vocal, and political, but not bought or elite.

Question 21

rawls definition of civil disobedience

Answer 21

public, nonviolent, conscientious, and a political act contrary to law aimed at changing unjust laws or politics
Rawls says civil disobedience works as a stabilizing device in a nearly just society.

Question 22

rawls distinctions of civil disobedience

Answer 22

• vertical, which differs from revolution/military disobedience, test cases, and legal protest
• horizontal, which differs from personal conscientious objection, based on non-public values (like private morality, or religious doctrine).

Question 23

rawls justification for when civil disobedience is justified

Answer 23

non-exhaustive conditions
substantial and clear injustice, last resort, and coordination/alliance with other dissenting minority groups.
- even with these, civil disobedience can still be wrong

Question 24

delmas on when civil disobedience is justified

Answer 24

Delmas proposes that sometimes people have not just a right, but a duty to disobey—especially when:

The legal system upholds injustice

Individuals benefit from unjust structures

Legal avenues for change are ineffective or inaccessible

Obedience would amount to complicity in oppression

She also expands civil disobedience to include uncivil acts (e.g., sabotage, leaks, or disruption), arguing that the moral force of resistance can’t be limited to polite, rule-bound protest when the system itself is unjust.

Question 25

arendt on the good man

Answer 25

good man is someone who refuses to do anything he believes is morally wrong, even if that means withdrawing from public life ex. thoreau, who didnt pay slavery taxs

Question 26

arendt on the good citizen

Answer 26

good citizen is someone who participates in politics and accepts compromise in order to preserve & improve the system (acting strategically, and just morally) ex. lincoln, who delayed abolition to preserve the union

Question 27

arendt on the good citizen and good man

Answer 27

says that civil disobedience arises in the space between them

Question 28

arendt against rawls

Answer 28

says civil disobedience is not neither his vertical or horizontal objection because conscience (horizontal) is subjective so therefore, group/collective action is what makes civil disobedience

Question 29

rawls on how civil disobedience is different from other types of lawbreaking (his distinctions) ; revolution

Answer 29

- not revolution because civil disobedience aims to challenge a system's law but not overthrow it; "this system is worth fixing, and im trying to fix it by holding it accountable to its own ideals"

Question 30

rawls on how civil disobedience is different from other types of lawbreaking (his distinctions) ; conscientious refusal

Answer 30

- conscientious refusal is when someone disobeys a law for private moral or religion reasons, but isn't trying to change a law or persuade others vs he says conscience must be grounded in SHARED political values

Question 31

rawls on how civil disobedience is different from other types of lawbreaking (his distinctions) ; criminal action

Answer 31

- says crime is usually self-interested and hidden, but the civil disobedience wants to get caught, because that hot part of the message is spread

Question 32

rawls on punishment

Answer 32

civil disobedience should accept not because it is just but because it shows they still respect the legal system this shows that their protest is about justice, not about chaos or personal gains also makes it more persuasive to the public, because it proves their sincerity and moral seriousness

Question 33

rawls role of civil disobedience

Answer 33

as a stabilizing force in a democracy - alerts the public to deep injustices that the system isnt fixing - helps prevent more extreme responses - holds the government accountable to the values it claims to uphold, like liberty, equality, and fairness

Question 34

king on what makes laws unjust

Answer 34

- a just law uplifts its people with dignity and fairness - an unjust law degrades people and promotes inequality and cruelty - if a law is passed by a group that denies others the right to vote its illegitimate - even a neutral law becomes unjust if its used selectively to silence protests so not abt what the law says, but how its enforced

Question 35

hart rule of recognition

Answer 35

secondary law to check if a law is valid or not

Question 36

harts primary and secondary rules

Answer 36

Primary rules: rules about duties (ex. How to move pieces in chess) Secondary rules: rules about primary rules (ex. How to change chess rulebook), three types of rules Rules of change (changing laws) Rules of adjudication (enforcing laws)