Terms Flashcards
Tyranny of the Majority
Tocqueville: “But this is the language of a slave.”- majority rule is not justified. inaccurate to conclude that the majority of mankind condones it, therefore, it is right. Thinks of the majority and minority as two separate individuals; can one really have a right to oppress another? If law is justice and the nation the jury, then laws cannot be followed and justice cannot be reached because of the tyrannous nature of the majority; no safeguard against absolute power in the hands of the majority Notes from Casson: psychological tyranny- the majority creeps into our minds and influences us internally, what do most people do?, danger of conformity of thought
Mill:Majority rules out the few, where the loudest are heard.
ancient and modern liberty
Constant: compares liberties in France, UK, and US; ancients liberty was in exercising direct political power-freedom to run the government-was compatible with collective freedom, but the individual submitted to the authority of the community. “we can no longer enjoy the liberty of the ancients, which consisted in an active and constant participation in collective power.” Ancients willing to sacrifice many negative rights to preserve the peer of their individual vote. now, sacrificing negative rights, we are giving more to gain less (opposite when the voice could make a difference). negative= modern liberty, positive = ancient liberty
negative and positive liberty
Berlin: freedom in someone’s personal liberties, leads to a restraint on someone else’s; liberty is liberty, not equality or fairness; questions of “who governs me” versus “how far does government interfere with me.” the freedom between being one’s own master and the freedom from not being prevented in what I want to do by other men (positive and negative liberty) two selves; “true” self has a higher purpose and is determined by the collective thought of all members of a group- different to say “i know what’s best for you” and try to coerce you into something than to say “this is good, therefore i am not being coerced and will it.” Notes from Casson: positive liberty- ability/capacity, genuine purposes/higher self, capacity to limit/control ourselves. negative liberty- absence from restriction or coercion, sphere of free action, hobbesian. Berlin worries about gov. enforcement of “positive liberties” (this is authoritarian) and defining what “free” is.`
defense of positive liberty
Taylor: Albania (ban on religion) being more free than Britain (who allows religion, but has more traffic lights) because there are more acts restricted by traffic lights than a ban on religion- proof that even negative liberty needs to applied with a conception of what is significant. “Freedom cannot be just the absence of external obstacles for there may also be internal ones.” People can deceive themselves and not know what they want. Notes from Casson: positive liberty can be helpful; shows ppl the way to be free. it’s not what’s good for you, but what’s free. Someone who seeks something trivial, personal is less free; higher purposes make you more free. we need to focus on equality (of opportunity?) instead of liberty and then positive liberty evolves from this.
liberty and equality
Dworkin: wanting something as opposed to being entitled to it. There’s really no general right to liberty. the idea of a right to liberty is a misconceived concept because (1)it creates a false sense of a necessary conflict between liberty and other values when social regulation is proposed and (2)it provides too easy an answer to the question of why we regard certain kinds of restraints as especially unjust. Notes from Casson: do we really have a “right” to be free? rights are limited by rights of others, equality is more important, within framework of “politically equal” we can find freedom or liberty.
virtue and collective liberty
Machiavelli: all cannot live to moral standards and instead look to be good, but act in order to maintain order, etc. -committed to self-government -tries to explain how a republic can protect itself -Christianity undermines ability to protect ourselves
democratic corruption
Tocqueville: democracy can breed servile people -liberal democracy makes us less servile -we become less committed to common enterprise of society, etc.
republicianism
Skinner: it is generally assumed that the idea of political liberty is negative and that the presence of liberty is marked by the absence of something else (particularly, the absence of some element of constraint). it is suggested that to attain our fullest liberty, there are only certain, rational ends that we are “free” to pursue. he agrees with aristotle- two premises to note, human beings are moral and have “characteristically human purposes” and that our purposes are “essentially social in character”- these contribute to a positive freedom. we are only genuinely or fully at liberty when we are engaging in acts conducive to “human flourishing” and embody our deepest human purposes. MacCallum and others argue that liberty is being unrestrained from choosing; Taylor says freedom has to do with actions in pursuing an end goal (free from own limits?). according to republicanism, a state is free only if it has “positive” liberty (think of state as individual, but the will of citizens determines unhindered action). This leads to civic greatness and wealth. To uphold freedoms in a republic, certain “capacities” are required (1) we must have great care for our freedom (because who else will?) and (2) need to have enough prudence to play an active and effective role in public life. however, most people don’t recognize that this is the way to attain the most liberty and must be forced out of patterns of self-interest. Notes from Casson: highlights importance of history’s importance to political theory, taken by the patriotism/commitment of republicanism
harm and liberty principles
Mill: principle only applies to people in “the maturity of their faculties” - children and barbarians excluded
exclusions from liberty principle
Mill: principle only applies to people in “the maturity of their faculties” -children and barbarians excluded
arguments for freedom of thought
Mill: the minority voice could be right, so it’s better if we hear it. even if the idea is wrong, there is still utility for hearing it (this goes for any opinion). by listening to the minority, we might start reconsidering “dead dogmas” or ideas that our widely held beliefs that, when go unquestioned, end up feeble and empty. the real meaning of our ideas is lost if we aren’t constantly questioning their validity. even more of a danger is that we become soo complacent with accepted ideas, that we may not be able to defend them against inaccurate ones and false idea will, thus, gain steam.
dead dogmas
Mill: by listening to the minority, we might start reconsidering “dead dogmas” or ideas that our widely held beliefs that, when go unquestioned, end up feeble and empty. the real meaning of our ideas is lost if we aren’t constantly questioning their validity. even more of a danger is that we become soo complacent with accepted ideas, that we may not be able to defend them against inaccurate ones and false idea will, thus, gain steam.
self and other regarding actions
Mill: there’s a difference between self-regarding and other-regarding actions. we can supervise and regulate other-regarding actions, but not those that are purely self-regarding.
arguments against “rights”
Mill: if we have absolute freedom (all possible rights and liberties) some people will use this to exploit others. rights are not “natural”- they are only justified when they bring overall happiness or utility
indirect utilitarianism
Wolff: “The insight of indirect utilitarianism is to note that, instead of setting out a single law- maximize happiness- the utilitarian legislator might do much better, in terms of the general happiness, to set out a larger body of law, which guarantees and respects secure rights of individuals.” Bentham and Mill may have only intended this for the use by legislators, not actually aimed at the general public
sidgqick and secrecy
Wolff: the general public should be given general, straight-forward maxims to follow, while the government knows the real procedures/truth. worries that the public would try to calculate in direct utilitarian terms, which would be inaccurate and not help us reach maximum utility.
individuality
Mill: 3 arguments for individuality- (1) leaving people to themselves will tend to make them happier than if we insist they follow society’s recommendations→ we know what will make us happy more than anybody else, ppl make mistakes and we should be allowed to make them, although others are obligated to persuade us against a foolish action (2) will lead to better decisions in the long run, and the exercise of freedom of choice itself is vital to the full development of human nature. (3) “in proportion to the development of his individuality, each person becomes more valuable to himself, and is therefore capable of being more valuable to others” think both positive and negative role models- can persuade or dissuade you from how to live (most important argument for individuality)
critique of liberty principle
Devlin: immorality is an offense against society; there is no “private sphere”, really. how do we intervene with the liberty principle if there is no collective judgment? collective judgment is based on morals; society is a community of ideas, therefore our ideas of what is good and what is evil cannot be kept from society. “The bondage is part of the price of society; and mankind, which needs society, must pay its price […]” paying the price meaning submitting to society-determined morals Notes from Casson: Devlin was shocked by the idea of not prohibiting some acts (ex. prostitution, sodomy, etc.) ; laws shaped by customary morality (overall, encourages utility; prostitution will have a terrible effect on the person)
political vs. human emancipation
Marx: political emancipation is empty- encourages egotism; idea of liberal equality is a sham (property, equality, security), worried about “egotistical” rights, this is a “slight of hand”; empty, abstract right if you don’t possess it. need to remember- marx believes were are naturally want to create and our own self is made foreign to ourselves (not human emancipation) *superstructure and basis (cupcake analogy- the basis is the cake part and the “reality” of the situation, superstructure is what we see (the frosting) and includes architecture, fashion, philosophy, pop culture, religion, law, etc.)
extreme liberal individualism
Wolff: entirely hypothetical; holds 4 views (1) the task of political philosophy is to devise principles of justice (2) freedom and equality of individuals is of the utmost importance (3) justice is a priority; above all other goods (4) any rights, duties and responsibilities we have can be understood as somehow arising out of the actions of individuals (foundations of rights are duties)
communitarianism
Wolff: task of political philosophy is “to generate the vision of a good society” Notes from Casson: are freedom and equality really the most important? social or common good instead of justice; ask, “how de we create a flourishing society”.
conservatism
Wolff: it is a mistake to think political philosophy has any tasks at all; habits and tradition are the most important virtues to consider; our traditions and inherited institutions contain more wisdom than we do and it would be dangerous to over-throw these ideas. Notes from Casson: tradition, custom (wants to conserve what’s there); there may be a moment when heritage or tradition “trumps” justice
Bradley’s holism
Wolff: the individual is an illusion; it actually doesn’t exist because we cannot take ourselves entirely out of the communities, cultures, etc. we are a part of. from this, the state is an organism and the individual an organ (literal interpretation of ‘body politic’) Notes from Casson: closely related to Hegel (Bradley is English Hegel),, disagrees that you could step out of your culture and judge it, we are the product of our culture; we cannot eliminate inherent thought related to this
sex v. gender
Wolff: “Sex is identified as a purely biological category; gender a social or ‘socially constructed’ category,”
affirmative action
Wolff: “Involves preferential hiring or admissions policies” ; consistent with liberal individualism: “They are ways of assigning rights and duties with the ultimate goal of achieving a form of freedom of occupational choice and equality
capitalism and patriarchy
Wolff: - patriarchy= male dominance
- arguments that there is link b/w cap. and pat.: 1) capitalist work relations constantly reproduce oppressive relations w/in the family 2) male dominance creates capitalism 3) capitalism and patriarchy are in reciprocal relation (190)
Gilligan on justice and care
Wolff: two types of approach to moral questions:
- justice approach: matter of seeking abstract rules or principles which can be used to resolve specific moral difficulties
- care perspective: requires one to consider the particularities of the situation, and therefore making a decision on a much more concrete, case-by-case basis (Gilligan prefers this perspective) (192)
- men tend to go with justice and rights perspective, while women the perspective of care
