Darwall Flashcards
What is the main argument of Darwall’s “Authority and Reasons”?
Darwall argues that true authority requires answerability, meaning that if someone has authority over another, the latter must be accountable to them.
He critiques Raz’s Normal Justification Thesis (NJT) for failing to establish this accountability.
What are second-personal reasons?
Definition: Reasons that arise when someone makes a legitimate demand on another person.
They involve mutual recognition of authority and accountability.
Different from instrumental (practical benefits) or epistemic (expert knowledge) reasons.
What are the four interrelated second-personal concepts?
- Practical authority – The right to make valid demands.
- Valid claim/demand – A justified expectation placed on another.
- Accountability – Being answerable to an authority.
- Second-personal reason – A reason that arises from legitimate authority.
Key point: These concepts are interdependent—one cannot exist without the others.
What is Raz’s Normal Justification Thesis (NJT)?
NJT claims that authority is justified when obeying it helps individuals better comply with independent reasons that apply to them.
Example: A government can have authority if following its laws makes people act in ways that are independently justified.
How does Darwall critique NJT?
❌ NJT assumes that practical authority is justified by benefits, but true authority requires accountability.
✔ Just because following authority helps a person does not mean they are obligated to obey.
✔ Example: A financial expert can give good advice, but that doesn’t mean you are accountable to them.
What is the difference between epistemic and practical authority?
Epistemic authority = Expertise → Gives advice on what is best.
Practical authority = Right to command → Creates an obligation to obey.
Key distinction: Practical authority involves accountability, whereas epistemic authority does not.
What is Raz’s Preemption Thesis?
Raz argues that authoritative directives create preemptive reasons, meaning they provide a reason to act while excluding conflicting reasons.
Example: A government-imposed speed limit excludes personal judgments about safe driving speed.
How does Darwall critique Raz’s Preemption Thesis?
❌ Raz assumes that an authoritative directive automatically excludes conflicting reasons.
✔ Darwall argues that authority doesn’t just override reasons—it creates obligations through accountability.
✔ Example: A speed limit is binding because citizens are accountable to the state, not just because it improves compliance with safety concerns.
How does Darwall argue that political and legal authority must be justified?
Legal authority cannot be justified only by NJT.
Instead, authority should be based on a shared moral framework.
Inspired by Rawls’ contractualism – legitimacy must be based on principles that no one can reasonably reject.
What is Darwall’s alternative theory of authority?
True authority must be second-personal and grounded in mutual accountability.
Political and legal authority must come from a shared recognition of legitimate claims.
Key takeaway: Authority is not about efficiency—it’s about moral relationships and obligations.
Final Takeaways
Authority requires answerability—NJT does not establish this.
Epistemic authority (expert knowledge) ≠ Practical authority (right to command).
Obligation comes from second-personal authority, not just better reasoning.
Legal and political authority require mutual accountability, not just NJT.
