-
356Population and Having Children NowJournal of Practical Ethics 5 (2): 49-61. 2017.This paper aims to state the obvious – the commonsense, rational approach to child-producing. We have no general obligation to promote either the “general happiness” or the equalization of this and that. We have children if we want them, if their life prospects are decent – and if we can afford them, which is a considerable part of their life prospects being OK – and provided that in doing so we do not inflict injury on others. It’s extremely difficult to do this latter, but affording them, in r…Read more
-
831Resolving the Debate on Libertarianism and AbortionLibertarian Papers 8 267-272. 2016.I take issue with the view that libertarian theory does not imply any particular stand on abortion. Liberty is the absence of interference with people’s wills—interests, wishes, and desires. Only entities that have such are eligible for the direct rights of libertarian theory. Foetuses do not; and if aborted, there is then no future person whose rights are violated. Hence the “liberal” view of abortion: women (especially) may decide whether to bear the children they have conceived. Birth is a go…Read more
-
57When, If Ever, Do We Aggregate? And Why?Social Philosophy and Policy 26 (1): 48-75. 2009.Aggregation in moral philosophy calls for the summing or averaging of values or utilities as a guide to individual behavior. But morality, it is argued, needs to be individualistic, in view of the evident separateness of persons, especially given the great disparities among individuals who nevertheless interact with each other in social life. The most plausible general moral program is the classical liberal (or “libertarian”) one calling for mutual noninterference rather than treating others as …Read more
-
44Reiman on Labor, Value, and the Difference PrincipleThe Journal of Ethics 18 (1): 47-74. 2014.In As Free and as Just as Possible: The Theory of Marxian Liberalism, Jeffrey Reiman proposes to develop a theory of “Marxian Liberalism.” ‘Liberalism’ here is defined by the principle that “sane adult human beings should be free in the sense of free from coercion that would block their ability to act on the choices they make.” While the idea of coercion could use some glossing, it is not obvious that poverty, unemployment, racism, and sexism are as such coercive. In this book, it is, very broad…Read more
-
24Comment on Levy's ‘Forced to be free? Increasing patient autonomy by constraining it’Journal of Medical Ethics 40 (5): 302-303. 2014.The general thrust of Neil Levy's paper is that a certain amount of paternalism should be viewed as compatible with liberalism.1 I am not quite convinced that what he is defending is properly paternalism. In addition, I am not entirely sure what his proposal is. Here are a few comments about several points in the paper.1. A possibly small question is worth raising when Levy says, ‘That is, the state may not interfere with individuals’ actions, even to promote their own conception of the good. Th…Read more
-
29ResponseInternational Journal of Applied Philosophy 25 (2): 259-272. 2011.Gibbard accuses me of having an “extreme” view of property rights, even though he agrees that liberty is a good thing. But is it good enough to justify excluding handouts to the poor? He thinks not. I argue that the “social contract” idea of justice, which he in general shares, would underwrite the sort of strong property rights I plump for—noting that voluntary assistance to the poor (or anyone) is, after all, not only perfectly acceptable but much to be commended. I believe I agree entirely wi…Read more
-
32God by design?In Neil A. Manson (ed.), God and Design: The Teleological Argument and Modern Science, Routledge. pp. 80--88. 2003.
-
49Morality and utilityJohns Hopkins University Press. 1967.This book is a general account of utilitarianism. It claims to provide a justification of the theses in Mill's On Liberty in utilitarian terms. There are several innovations relative to prevailing utilitarian literature of the day.
-
44Utilitarianism, group actions, and coordination or, must the utilitarian be a Buridan's ass?Noûs 10 (2): 173-194. 1976.
-
53Equality vs. Liberty: Advantage, LibertySocial Philosophy and Policy 2 (1): 33. 1984.The subject of this essay is political, and therefore social, philosophy; and therefore, ethics. We want to know whether the right thing for a society to do is to incorporate in its structure requirements that we bring about equality, or liberty, or both if they are compatible, and if incompatible then which if either, or what sort of mix if they can to some degree be mixed. But this fairly succinct statement of the issue before us requires considerable clarification, even as a statment of the i…Read more
-
Letting people be people and the right to propertyIn James P. Sterba (ed.), Social and Political Philosophy: Contemporary Perspectives, Routledge. pp. 115. 2001.
-
159Animal RightsCanadian Journal of Philosophy 7 (1). 1977.What do we owe to the lower animals, if anything? The issues raised by this question are among the most fascinating and fundamental in ethical theory. They provide a real watershed for the moral philosopher and, on perhaps the most widely professed view, a trenchant test of consistency in ethical practice. Among the virtues of these two challenging books is that they make painfully clear that there has been a paucity of clear and plausible argument in support of the nearly universal tendency of …Read more
-
7Discussion: Must We Choose between Chandran Kukathas's 'Two Constructions of Libertarianism'?Libertarian Papers 1 22. 2009.Kukathas, in “Two Constructions of Libertarianism,” concludes that “the choice confronting libertarians is an invidious one. … The Federation of Liberty can, in principle, turn out to contain no communities of that federation which actually value or respect liberty; and even slavery might have a lawful place within it. The Union of Liberty, on the other hand, can, in principle turn out to be society ruled by a strong authority with little respect for dissenting moral traditions, including some s…Read more
-
20Sterba on Liberty and WelfarismAnalyse & Kritik 37 (1-2): 203-222. 2015.James Sterba advances several arguments designed to show that libertarianism, contrary to what this author and other libertarians think, actually implies support for welfarism and even egalitarianism. This discussion shows why his arguments do not work. There is preliminary discussion of our parameters: how much is Sterba claiming we have a minimum right to in the way of welfare? It is argued that if this is set very low, a libertarian society would easily eliminate the poverty he is concerned a…Read more
-
36Book Reviews : Law, Legislation and Liberty, Vol. II: The Mirage of Social Justice. BY FRIED-RICH A. HAYEK. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1977, Pp. xiv + 196. $10.00 (review)Philosophy of the Social Sciences 10 (3): 325-328. 1980.
-
423Pacifism: A philosophical analysisEthics 75 (4): 259-271. 1965.Of all the attitudes and theories associated with or identified as "pacifism," only the doctrine that everyone ought not to resist violence with force is of philosophical interest, And it is logically incoherent. Pacifism's popularity rests on confusions about what the doctrine really is. If we have rights, We have the right to prevent infringements upon them. We have the right to use force to protect our rights, And in the degree necessary to accomplish that end. (staff)
-
Classical vs. Modern Liberalism: Advantage, Classical'In Sirkku Hellsten, Marjaana Kopperi & Olli Loukola (eds.), Taking the Liberal Challenge Seriously: Essays on Contemporary Liberalism at the Turn of the 21st Century, Ashgate. pp. 9. 1997.
-
60For and Against the State: New Philosophical Readings (edited book)Rowman & Littlefield. 1996.This collection addresses the central issue of political philosophy or, in a couple of cases, issues very close to the heart of that question: Is government justified? This ancient question has never been more alive than at the present time, in the midst of continuing political and social upheaval in virtually every part of the world. Only two of the pieces collected here have been published previously. All the other contributions were, at the time of the inception of the volume, fresh from the…Read more
-
24Reply to RipsteinDialogue 29 (2): 299-. 1990.One reason for professing sympathy for such an unpopular view as libertarianism is that one acquires such worthy opponents. Arthur Ripstein's notice was a pleasure to read and, as I would expect, gives one plenty to think about. In this very brief reply, though, I can only identify some points on which I think he may have misstated my view, or on which I can offer a quick rebuttal.
-
10In the Interest of the Governed: A Study in Bentham's Philosophy of Utility and Law (review)Philosophical Review 84 (3): 422. 1975.
-
86Political Correctness: For and AgainstRowman & Littlefield Publishers. 1994.Two prominent philosophers here engage in a forthright debate over some of the centrally disputed topics in the political correctness controversy now taking place on college campuses across the nation, including feminism, campus speech codes, the western canon, and the nature of truth. Friedman and Narveson conclude the volume with direct replies to each other's positions
-
104On Dworkinian EqualitySocial Philosophy and Policy 1 (1): 1. 1983.1. INTRODUCTION Professor Dworkin's writings on moral and political subjects have never failed to interest me in the past, and the two-part article “What is Equality” which is the subject of this paper, is no exception. Its wealth of relevant distinctions is bound to be useful to every serious student of the subject, whatever – or, in view of the range of opinions on these matters now current, perhaps I should say almost whatever – his ideological proclivities, and whether or not he is sympathet…Read more
-
2Why Care about Liberty?Philosophic Exchange 38 (1). 2008.This is the age of the welfare state. The general assumption is that something is amiss if governments do not provide benefits to its people. Since these benefits are funded by coercive taxation, this implies that those who are taxed are morally required to pay for benefits for others. This paper argues that this assumption is mistaken. Like the founders of the American republic, I argue that government should protect individual liberty, not provide benefits to the needy.
-
University of WaterlooDepartment of Philosophy
Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
Areas of Specialization
Value Theory |