Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

PY1011 > Political Theory > Flashcards

Political Theory Flashcards

1
Q

In what way, according to Kant, do persons have independence?

A

An act of will is when we choose our ends and deploy the means to them

We have a right to do this (“right to independence from others”) - Arthur Ripstein

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What are two ways to interfere with independence

A

“drawing [a] person into purposes that she has not chosen”
“depriving [a person] of her means”

Arthur Ripstein ^^

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

In Kant’s eyes, if a state is set up properly, what should it do?

A
  • Doesn’t interfere with independence
  • necessary for the protection of independence

Enforces private right, extending the means of people

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What are the three cases of private right?

A
  1. Property: Taking possession of an inanimate object as a means to my own ends
  2. Contract: Drawing another person into my ends, or using him/her as a means, with consent
  3. Status: Taking possession of another person as a means to his/her ends, without consent
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What is Kant’s (Arthur RIpstein’s) view of public rights?

A
  • The morally troubling aspect of property acquisition
  • The need for an omni-lateral will - you not changing other’s rights
  • The state as an embodiment of this:
    a) public rules on property (and contract and status)
    b) Dispute resolution (thus preserving honour)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What are the sources of moral/political norms?

A
  1. Oneself: Eudaimonism, Reason (eg First formulation of CI, esp law of nature)
  2. The world: Utilitarianism (lecture 23)
  3. Other people: Rights (eg 2nd for of CI, esp humanity variant) - capturing the idea of dignity or intrinsic value
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Whats the upshot of seeing things the ‘other people’ way?

A

Certain ways we may not treat a person, even if treating him that way would be good for oneself or good for others

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What is a big question for right theory?

A

Are rights natural or political/legal?
Kant’s answer: Ideally should be natural, by practice political

Rights exist to protect the right-holder’s will

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Kant on the state’s role in promoting the good and rights

State exists to enable us to live in a rightful condition by

A
  • Protection of right to independence through protection of property rights
    Having own shelter and that without state & omni, you are affecting rights of others
  • Keeping us from wronging each other in property disputes

This does not amount to making us morally good people, right to independence is an external right

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Kant on the state’s role in promoting the good and rights

State as a restriction on the pursuit of happiness

A

State is not to set happiness - creation as an end - 2 reasons:

  • Disagreement over nature of happiness (nature of happiness not discoverable as a priority)
  • Threat of tyranny - trying to make you happy
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What are Kant’s political views?

A

Libertarian/liberal

He is a social-contract politically but not morally

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Explain the tyranny of the majority

A

A result of ‘self government’ as a solution to monarchical tyranny (Rousseau, maybe Kant), but no real solution as just transferring power, might have more input to how power is used but can still be tyrannical

Exercised in two ways:

  1. Control the levers of power (government and branches)
  2. Through informal pressure to what one likes or dislikes and try to conform others to these likings/dislikings –> value judge

Worse (2) as cant escape social circles, more effective coercion - limits creativity and free will/individuality –> Geniuses cant be geniuses –> society would be worse off and not progress

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

In what ways might Liberalism/Libertarianism be solutions to the tyranny problem?

A
  • Social contract Libertarianism: The state is minimal cos external right is minimal
  • Mill’s moderate liberalism: Fundamental divide between morality and politics - not state’s job to force morality, even if possible to do so, state power should not be put to the end of enforcing value judgements (avoid tyranny of the majority)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

How is the Harm Principle the only justification for encroaching on someone else’s liberty?

A

Self-protection from harm, 3rd party may intervene so long as it really a case of harm (state can also do this)

Not clear how it is defended, guess it to appeal to the good
We ought to live and let live, beneficial to society

Animals and disabled people aren’t considered/don’t apply

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What is blow back theory?

A

Coercing will lead to begrudging people striking back

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

How is Mill a liberal and not a libertarian?

What is his stance on life and letting people live?

A

He is concerned about people living good lives

Life is an experiment - we get data from that (learn from others)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

How is Mill’s Harm Principle formalised and what is the important distinction within it

A
  • If a proposed interference with liberty would serve the end of self-protection, then it is warranted (instructive)
  • If a proposed interference with liberty would not serve the end of self-protection, then it isn’t warranted (restrictive)

If your room is clean then you can play (no matter what time of day)
vs
If your room isn’t clean then you cant play (doesn’t take into consideration time, doesn’t mean above)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

What are some questions to ask the Harm Principle?

A
  • Harm to self doesn’t count in harm principle - exceptions though like falling bridge
  • Harmless immoral conduct (eg desecrating a grave) doesn’t apply; harm is key not morality
  • Offensive conduct: Public conduct; There is a kind of harm in which we can intervene
    Private conduct; Even if still causes some offence to you but should leave them be
  • Harm of omission and liberty (not helping when you could) does apply

Offensive conduct often is subject to visceral judgement –> is there a difference between witnessing it and not –> Shouldn’t impose on people based on judgements

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Provide some implications for civil liberties - guaranteed liberties

A
  • Freedom of Conscience, think what you want
  • Freedom of expression, judgement sensitive (apart from possibly speech inciting violence)
  • Tastes & pursuits, live how you want
  • Combining (assembly), get to choose who you associate with –> This is ok so long as your shared views aren’t imposed on others

Most important question to ask: are they harmed?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

How does Sarah Conly define Paternalism?

A

“Any case where X acts to diminish Y’s freedom, to the end that Y’s good may be second”

Preventing A from harming B is not paternalistic, stopping A from harming A is
Government paternalism is when they step in to alter people’s lives what they believe is best for them

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

How do we decide if legislation is paternalistic or not?

What are some effects of paternalistic legislation?

A

Whether legislation is paternal or not depends on its aims - this is different to its effects

Paternalism or perceived paternalism can be insulting, degrading etc (eg the Burka ban)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

What is Kant’s view on Paternalism?

A

It wouldn’t be good cos government would be interfering with other’s will - its not their job to make us ‘happy’

23
Q

What is Mill’s view on Paternalism?

A

Wouldn’t be good as it would infringe on creativity and if it doesn’t prevent harm it wouldn’t be warranted (but maybe in certain cases)

24
Q

What are some of the types of paternalism?

A
  1. ‘Lib/Libert’: based on what we already believe to be good
  2. ‘Perfectionist’: Government subbing in different theory of what you believe is good for you –> Main objection is that it is insulting and degrading etc
  3. ‘Hard’: Make it very difficult to make harmful choice
  4. ‘Soft’: Make harmful choice unappealing but not more difficult
25
Q

Give some big explaining about Soft Paternalism

A

Persuading people to make good choices without force
aka Libertarian paternalism, very recent

  • Seems to be effective (eg Nudge Unit & social norming tax payment)
  • Seems to target real problem: Cognitive shortcomings,
    Lack of knowledge or self control
    Biases - Daniel Kahneman ‘Thinking fast and slow’

Allows for choice but also acknowledges cognitive bias

26
Q

What is an objection to Soft paternalism?

A

Hard Paternalism will be more effective as it will be more difficult to do

27
Q

Outline some of the arguments for and against junk food regulation

A
  • Control
    + We don’t know what’s in it plus cognitive bias
  • Culture and Identity - disrespect
    + Not really food but event behind it plus no [wifi signal] between food and culture set in stone
  • Diversity of tastes
    + Unavoidable generality of laws plus Stultification inapplicable, still get access to junk food
  • Some people handle it better then others so shouldn’t restrict them
    Way of expressing themselves –> link back to creativity in harm principle
28
Q

Discuss the ‘universality’ of democratic citizenship

A
  1. Universal Membership: Equal (ie equally inclusive) citizenship for everyone
  2. Universal Standpoint: Citizens should be treated equally under the law
  3. Universal Treatment: Citizens should be treated equally under the law
  4. Differentiated Citizenship: Rejects (2) & (3) - eg Black Panther, Native Americans (Canada)

Historical claim: Oppressed groups strive for (4), want to be seen as equal, but also as different, and valued/respected/treated as different
Conceptional Claim: (1) requires (4); (1) is undermined by (2) & (3)

29
Q

What is the Republican idea of citizenship and ‘General Will’?

A

Citizens unite and reason together from a universal and impartial standpoint that transcends their private differences, experiences, attachments, and interests
(eg Rousseau)

30
Q

What is a General complaint of a Universal Standpoint?

A

The idea that citizens should participate in public discussion by adopting some ‘shared’ standpoint has various consequences:
- Rationalises exclusion of groups/individuals who are deemed incapable of adopting the ‘general’ point of view (eg women, poor etc) cos they think differently
It is effectively prejudice
- Reinforces Privilege: Privileged groups will likely dominate public discourse, force some to be lacking then exclude them for being lacking
- The ‘universal’ standpoint is a myth: “People necessarily and properly consider public issues in terms influenced by their situated experience and perception of social relations” (Iris Young)
Always that the minority is oppressed and live differently

31
Q

What is the general complaint of Equal treatment under the law?

A

Difference - blind laws perpetuate rather than undermine oppression. This is because informed bias and discrimination can govern the application of such laws

  • Bias is inevitable - even if informally or subconsciously, way to compensate is to give more to disadvantaged
  • Some people should be treated differently (equity vs equality)
32
Q

What does Young say we need to do regarding Differentiated Citizenship?

A
  1. Self-organisation of oppressed groups: so that they gain a sense of collective empowerment and a reflective understanding of their collective experience and interests - come together to reflect
  2. Institution considering of groups’ perspective: an institutionalised opportunity for oppressed groups to offer their perspective on policy proposals that affect them, and for it to be seriously considered - privileged need to hear the unprivileged –> No one group can speak for another
  3. Special Rights: the rights of oppressed or disadvantaged groups to special privileges underlaw (eg Maternity leave, disabled access, affirmative action)

Shouldn’t be required in equal society

33
Q

What is Susan Okin’s definition of feminism?

A

“The belief that women should not be disadvantaged by their sex, that they should be recognized as having human dignity equally with men, and the opportunity to live as fulfilling and as freely chosen lives as men can”

34
Q

What is the Republican view of multiculturalism?

A

Makes public what is private

35
Q

What is multiculturalism?

A

Minorities or ways of life should have their individual rights protected and ensured

As a consequence, they “should be protected with special group rights and privileges” (Okin)

36
Q

What is one concern regarding multiculturalism?

A

Concerns with social fragmentation from lack of integration

lots of mainland European countries fear this because they don’t have very long immigration history

37
Q

What are some question to consider when looking at multiculturalism and feminism?

A

Is there tension between feminism and multiculturalism?
If so what?
And what should we do about it?

38
Q

List some arguments for multiculturalism

A
  1. Protect groups against disadvantage and oppression(young)
  2. Protect self-respect or ID of members of such groups (Kymlicka)
  3. Protect autonomy or the availability of meaningful ways of life (Kymlicka) –> Protect against assimilation from the minority
39
Q

What is the scope for multiculturalism?

A
  • May or may not extend to illiberal cultures (that impose “internal restrictions”) eg limits to freedom and cultural roles –> Need to give choice or at least right to exit
  • May involve special rights, or (in view of some) a right to be ‘left alone’

Equal representation of these subcultures does not guarantee protection of rights hence need for better focus on them

40
Q

Provide some big ol’ thoughts on why multiculturalism raises concerns for women in particular

A
  • Culture operates in ‘private sphere’ - determining laws of marriage, division of control of family property and inheritance, to which the activity/labour of women is often regulated
    Defence of cultural practices will therefore have a disproportionate impact on women and girls (as opposed to boys and men)
    + State should intervene but if they do then people are just gonna do it in a way in which state has no idea so need special rights and observation
  • Special rights might undermine liberalism, allowing for continuation of hierarchies
  • Also have to include eg religious laws into state law which people don’t like –> Surely then laws wont address the issue?
  • Most cultures have as one of their principal aims the control of women by men
41
Q

What is Okin’s proposal regarding Multiculturalism and women?

A

Make sure young women are involved in negotiations and fully represented, with groups seeking special protection, so that they will have a chance to make their voices heard

42
Q

What is one possible definition ‘Millist’ Liberalism?

A

Emphasis on individual self-determination and equality

Contentious as even one definition

43
Q

What definition of Liberalism and equality does Brain Barry regard as problematic?

A

‘Guaranteeing the equal outcome/impact of each individual’.

He thinks this is problematic as some people need more resources and time/effort due to expensive tastes and beliefs

44
Q

Outline the discussion for Equal opportunity/consideration of interests

A
  • Should anonymise interests as some are trivial and some aren’t but shouldn’t judge who its from
    + However, can lead to worse off outcomes/impacts for cultural minorities (eg food laws and language) - but that’s ok (Barry)
    + Can also lead to worse outcomes/impacts for cultural majorities (eg Sikhs and bus driver hats) - that’s fine (ECI)

Unequal impacts/outcomes are practically guaranteed in a free society due to pluralism and different tastes/beliefs - that’s fine
Just cos ok with it doesn’t mean should be insensitive to inequality

45
Q

What are some ways to mitigate inequality?

A

Minimum wage, max ownership of wealth eg

Could install social safety nets (eg free healthcare benefits etc)

46
Q

What is a Liberal view on giving special rights?

A

Cant give special rights by default, need consideration of everyone’s interests
Especially/only if its in the public sphere, can take it case-by-case (eg Sikh Bus driver)

47
Q

What do Barry and G.A. Cohen say on Equality of opportunity?

A

Barry = Belief should be treated like tastes, broader scope of EoO

Cohen = Only cared about economic opportunity and not religious or social too

48
Q

Liberalism and relationship with subcultures?

A

In effect, destroyer of subcultures as things are more likely to swing in favour of majorities
Have right to exit so they could leave

In principle, no cos shouldn’t feel guilty cos always doing best for majority so most fair - no specific prejudice, just how it works
Might be tyranny of the majority, but this isn’t oppression like that - more objective as its flexible (think Sikh)

49
Q

Is liberalism a destroyer of subculture?

A

In effect, sort of: Need to make sure people are at least aware of right to exit (even though Amish and women aren’t supposed to do education) –> what about informal pressures to leave though?

In principle, not quite as Liberalism can endorse partial political autonomy of subcultures (eg Amish, not same rights & responsibilities - that’s what it means as PA)

50
Q

For Barry, what is the most important thing when dealing with subcultures and how does this contrast to a point made by Okin?

A

As long as they have access to courts, that’s good enough

Okin says it aint cos of discrimination behind closed doors and in court (Subconscious or otherwise)

51
Q

What do Young and Barry say about universality as generality?

A

Young denies it (need set of truths for everyone to sign on)
Both her and Barry actually should accept lib
Lib is the truth/right answer for political questions - willing to impose it on subcultures with education and right to exit

52
Q

What do Young and Barry think on the issue of special access to politics for subcultures?

A

Barry no

Young yes - minorities will get drowned out otherwise

53
Q

What do Young and Barry think of the issue of the Blindness of law?

A

Barry no - makes exceptions for Sikhs and Jews eg

Young no

54
Q

What do Young, Barry and Okin think of group rights?

A

Yes to everyone (see lecture 28)

PY1011 (3 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions