Political Philosophy

Question 1

Name at least three qualities a state has -

Answer 1

• possesses a governing body
• control of legitimate force
• regulation/representation of it’s inhabitants
• supplies protection/benefits to it’s inhabitants
• jurisdiction over it’s inhabitants

Question 2

What theory is typically used to explain the relationship between the state and the individual?

Answer 2

The social contract.

Question 3

Describe Locke’s state of nature -

Answer 3

Locke believes rights are given to us by God, in a state of nature all men are reasonable and will respect what God gave us.

Question 4

Outline two issues with Locke’s state of nature -

Answer 4

1. His theory is dependent on the existence of God.

2. It is very likely that his “reasonable” state of nature would just descend into violence and chaos.

Question 5

Describe Hobbes’s state of nature -

Answer 5

For Hobbes, life in a state of nature is brutish, unpleasant and short. It is war and chaos (and probably more accurate than Locke’s state of nature).

Question 6

Describe Rousseau’s state of nature (in it’s early stages) -

Answer 6

Early on, life is peaceful and with little conflict - due to low population and lots of natural resources.

Question 7

Describe Rousseau’s state of nature (in it’s later stages) -

Answer 7

Eventually, as population increases, natural resources become more scarce and conflict increases (prompting the need for a social contract).

Question 8

Outline Rousseau’s first social contract -

Answer 8

It aims to protect the the interests of the wealthy/fortunate, so that they are protected from those less fortunate who may want to take their property.

Question 9

Detect two issues with Rousseau’s first social contract -

Answer 9

1. It only protects the interests of the wealthy, which is unfair.
2. It will likely serve to encourage resentment between the fortunate and the less fortunate.

Question 10

Outline Rousseau’s second social contract -

Answer 10

It involves the notion of “collective will”, meaning that

• everyone has an individual vote
• but is ruled by the majority

Question 11

What does Rousseau’s second social contract aim to fix?

Answer 11

Aims to fix the problems with the first social contract by giving everyone a voice.

Question 12

Detect two issues with Rousseau’s second social contract -

Answer 12

1. No government exists for Rousseau’s “collective will” theory.
2. Regardless of the individual vote, being ruled by the majority seems to hinder individual liberty.

Question 13

Outline Locke’s social contract -

Answer 13

We relinquish our complete freedom that the state will provide law/law enforcement. Basically we create a social contract so that others can be punished.

Question 14

Can consent be withdrawn from Locke’s social contract? If so, when?

Answer 14

Yes, if the state fails in it’s duties (i.e to protect you).

Question 15

Detect the main problem with Locke’s social contract -

Answer 15

We cannot settle things how we see fit (it is up to the state).

Question 16

Outline Hobbes’s social contract -

Answer 16

We give up complete freedom so that our life is protected by the state. They must protect us, but it is our duty to comply to and uphold their laws.

Question 17

Can consent be withdrawn from Hobbes’s social contract? If so, when?

Answer 17

Nope. Consent is permanent.

Question 18

Detect the main problem with Hobbes’s social contract -

Answer 18

If the state makes decisions supposedly to protect us that we don’t like, we can’t withdraw from the social contract. (Eg, no unhealthy foods for anyone, curfew at 6pm every night, no violent video games).

Question 19

Define Mill’s ‘harm principle’ -

Answer 19

The only reason for the state to interfere with a person’s freedom is if in exercising that freedom they will harm others.

Question 20

For Mill, is there a difference between harm and offence?

Answer 20

Yes, exercising your freedom (for example, watching pornography) may offend someone, but that is not the same as harming them. For Mill, offending someone is completely fine.

Question 21

Detect two major issues with Mill’s harm principle -

Answer 21

1. Whether or not ‘harm’ is inclusive of emotional harm.
2. The possibility of harming others emotionally with your actions. (Eg, a mother’s drug addiction emotionally harming her children).

Question 22

Detect two issues with Mill’s opinion of ‘harm and offence’.

Answer 22

1. If harm is inclusive of emotional harm, then offence could be a form of emotional harm.
2. It can be hard to distinguish (what is harm and what is just offence?)

Question 23

Describe Nozick’s ‘self-ownership’ theory -

Answer 23

We cannot infringe upon other’s rights to life, liberty and property, and they cannot infringe upon ours.

Question 24

What does Nozick suggest if our rights are infringed upon?

Answer 24

We can seek compensation.

Question 25

What’s the major issue with Nozick’s idea of seeking compensation?

Answer 25

In doing so we infringe upon the other person’s right to property.

Question 26

What’s an issue with defining “self ownership”?

Answer 26

Not all ownership is the same (eg, money compared to our organs).

Question 27

Does Nozick provide any reason as to why we shouldn’t violate these particular rights, and why is a reason necessary?

Answer 27

No, he doesn’t. And we should never just accept something with no solid, good reasons to back it up (that’s like Rule #1 of Philosophy!).

Question 28

Positive liberty is “freedom __”, negative liberty is “freedom ___”.

Answer 28

Positive liberty is “freedom to”, negative liberty is “freedom from”.

Question 29

Outline the concept of positive liberty -

Answer 29

“Freedom to act to fulfill one’s potential”

It is the capacity to make genuine choices (in terms of one’s actions/interests) and requires the presence of something, like self control or self determination.

Question 30

Outline the concept of negative liberty -

Answer 30

“Freedom from constraint”

It is defined by an absence of something (i.e constraints). It presupposes minimal interference by outside bodies.

Question 31

Why can it be said that positive and negative liberty are incompatible?

Answer 31

• where negative liberty requires minimal interference/constraints, positive liberty suggests that certain constraints may be necessary for people to make choices, (i.e schooling).
• we cannot be free from constraint as negative liberty suggests if positive liberty requires constraint.