The Politics of Jurisprudence: Liberty and Equality in Rawls and Dworkin

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

The Politics of Jurisprudence: Liberty and Equality in Rawls and Dworkin The Catholic Lawyer Volume 25 Number 2 Volume 25, Spring 1980, Number 2 Article 4 The Politics of Jurisprudence: Liberty and Equality in Rawls and Dworkin Stephen C. Hicks Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/tcl Part of the Jurisprudence Commons This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at St. John's Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Catholic Lawyer by an authorized editor of St. John's Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE POLITICS OF JURISPRUDENCE: LIBERTY AND EQUALITY IN RAWLS AND DWORKIN STEPHEN C. HICKS* Law as a general system of rules impartially applied acts as the me- dium of sovereign governmental order harmonizing the interests of indi- viduals and groups in society as equally and fairly as possible. The indi- vidual is free within the rules establishing security and order and is free from law which is not conducive to the general good. Similarly, an indi- vidual is free to pursue his own ends if they are compatible with the greatest happiness of the greatest number and also is free not to act on behalf of the common good. While these boundaries are defined by law, the actual social relations within them are the concern of ethics or psy- chology, not legislation.' Thus, political theory as utilitarianism sees the law according to its own representation of the good and its own descrip- tion of human nature. This is the original coordination of individual soci- ety and the body politic in our tradition. Moreover, despite the impor- tance of the twentieth century technological revolution and the transition from the standard of the greatest happiness of the greatest number to that of social welfare, both John Rawls' Theory of Justice and Ronald Dwor- kin's Taking Rights Seriously find utilitarianism to be representative enough of prevailing political attitudes to constitute their analytical start- ing points. Between Blackstone and Austin, however, there occurred a transformation in our way of being in law, which still characterizes the modem world, that both Rawls and Dworkin realize tends to narrow the place of law in our lives, reduce the law of human experience and make * Associate Professor of Law, Suffolk University Law School; M.A., 1971; LL.B., 1972, Downing College, England; LL.M., 1974, University of Virginia. I See J. AUSTIN, THE PROVINCE OF JURISPRUDENCE DETERMINED AND THE USES OF THE STUDY OF JURISPRUDENCE, 118-91 (1965). POLITICS OF JURISPRUDENCE 107 politics the only viable context for the determination of the ends of law's usefulness. Both Dworkin and Rawls address the adjustment of the balance in representative democracy between majority and minority interests. Dwor- kin's criterion is the relevance of minority goals, Rawls' are the principles of fairness. They deal with the same parts of the balance, namely princi- ples of distribution, as either equal treatment in Dworkin or according to the difference principle in Rawls, and at the other end of the scale, the fundamental right of treatment, as an equal in Dworkin and as liberty in Rawls. Finally, both base their theories on the dignity, respect, and politi- cal concern due individuals. But what they mean by each of these parts and the relationships among them is different. Underlying Rawls' theory is an ideal of social rather than political reciprocity, which means that individuals should be free from participation in the choices of the political process that do not operate in favor of the least advantaged representative individual concerned. The effect, therefore, is to reduce or restrain the very role of government-the agent of society acting for the common good. What underlies Dworkin's theory is an ideal of political respect whereby all have an equal voice in the means of choice without necessarily equality of distributed goods. As a result, one of Dworkin's main arguments is that minorities must have equal political power in some situations. This is readjustment within society according to the principle of equality, but up to the point only of an equal political say, and it rests on a traditional utilitarian concept of social morality, which sees the individual as a rational self-interested ego in a representative capacity and as subject within an objective system of law and order. Rawls' theory, on the other hand, admits readjustment ac- cording to equality but only up to the point of a like liberty for all. He argues that when there is liberty, rather an equal political say, we will have a better society. Moreover, this depends on individuals who are moral and disinterested in their social or interpersonal relations so that their concerns for the common good are limited to fairness rather than its maximization at the price of individual, minority, or social liberty. Com- mon to these two approaches is not just their starting point, namely, utili- tarianism, but the ethical ideal of respect. I shall try to show how Dwor- kin's sense of this is more traditional and Rawls' more fundamental, and what this means. Also, I shall try to suggest ways in which Rawls' sense can be more clearly thought of, and then what this shows of our thinking of rights and law generally. It is very significant that our experience of law as well as concept of law is now part of the focus of legal thought. That is, we are seeing law and man as interdependent once again, whether it is the state that is transparent to society through social morality or society that is transparent to individuals through personal morality. This occurs, moreover, at the same time as the alternative forms of social and liberal 25 CATHOLIC LAWYER, SPRING, 1980 democracy and their respective principles of social and political justice are being redefined. Thus the interdependence of law and man widens our perspective of justice to include at least society as well as politics. This is a significant move within the positivistic tradition. I shall begin with Dworkin's theory because he is more consistent with the whole evolution of the tradition, although his immediate ances- tor is probably Mill, for he shares with Mill a concern for the appropriate limits of government rather than the fact or the usefulness of government. Dworkin begins with the observation that there are two senses to "rights," which are a perennial source of confusion. In the weak sense, rights are good for one. In the strong sense, rights defend liberty from governmental interference.2 The utilitarian calculation of the greatest good is irrelevant to such strong rights, for the right to disobey is an essential feature of rights against the government, no matter what their political or economic rationale. There is, therefore, no general duty to obey the law because it is conditioned upon respect for these rights. On the other hand, there is no general liberty either, certainly not in the loose sense of license, for what Dworkin means by liberty is the kind of effective independence that is threatened by political inequality and paternalistic legislation.3 He claims, therefore, that rights are fundamental to the coordination of social liberty and political equality, and equality is the fundamental value of the whole system. The two senses of rights mean equal treatment in the distribution of resources and, more importantly, mean the right to treat- ment as an equal, which is based on equal respect and appears as equal participation in the political decision-making process.' The relationship between the two is such that there arises a right to equal treatment, apart from utilitarian calculations on the best distribution for maximizing the common good, only if that is necessary for treatment as an equal. Other- wise, if there exists treatment as equals, so the strong sense of rights is satisfied, the calculation of the common good democratically represents society's own inviolable concept of justice.5 According to Dworkin, the difficulty with the accepted constraint of utilitarianism is that the determination of the common good reflects ex- ternal preferences that are invariably not based on equal respect.' Thus, rights against the government arise when it effects only external prefer- ences and offends the premise of equal political respect which underlies the basic right to treatment as an equal. Moreover, he claims it is because of the tendency of the will of the majority to override equal respect and 2 R. DWORKnN, TAKING RIGHTS SERIOUSLY, 188-92 (1977). Id. at 263. Id. at 198-99, 272-73. Id. at 204-05. Id. at 276. POLITICS OF JURISPRUDENCE treatment as an equal that an individualistic and subjective notion of a right to liberty has gained credence.7 Liberty is not fundamental, how- ever, rights are. And equality is prior to liberty, because within existing political organization, freedom is contingent on social ends. This means the equality due a citizen in a representative democracy. That is, a citi- zen is at least equal before the law, and equal in law in its broadest politi- cal sense so as to participate in the determination of the common good.8 Therefore, if there is no violation of equal respect or the right to treatment as an equal, equal treatment in the distribution of resources can be al- tered to effect valid social ends, if the overall result is an increase in residual quality or the balance of effective political power. This is utilitarianism in reverse. Minorities can impose benefits on society at the price of the majority's external preferences so long as 'the exercise of minority rights in pursuit of their personal preferences does not violate anyone's rights to treatment as an equal.
Recommended publications
  • Jurisprudence--Philosophy Or Science Henry Rottschaefer
    University of Minnesota Law School Scholarship Repository Minnesota Law Review 1927 Jurisprudence--Philosophy or Science Henry Rottschaefer Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/mlr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Rottschaefer, Henry, "Jurisprudence--Philosophy or Science" (1927). Minnesota Law Review. 1465. https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/mlr/1465 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the University of Minnesota Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Minnesota Law Review collection by an authorized administrator of the Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. MINNESOTA LAW REVIEW Journal of the State Bar Association VOLUI%1E 11 MARCH, 1927 No. 4 JURISPRUDENCE- PHILOSOPHY OR SCIENCE By HENRY ROTTSCHAEFER* T WOULD perhaps be practically impossible to secure for any definition of the term Jurisprudence any very general accep- tance. It is doubtful whether there exists even any general agree- ment as to what subjects are within its scope. The problem of whether, and in what sense, it is to be considered philosophy or science, cannot, however, be discussed without adopting at least some tentative notion of its meaning that shall serve as the basis for the discussion. This can be more effectively done by a general description of the types of problem usually dealt with in treatises and courses on Jurisprudence than by framing a logically correct definition that secured accuracy and completeness by resort to a convenient vagueness. Investigation discloses its use to denote lines of inquiry having little in common other than a professed interest in general questions and problems concerning law and justice.
    [Show full text]
  • The Utilitarian Influence on American Legal Science in the Early Republic
    1 The Utilitarian Influence on American Legal Science in the Early Republic Steven J. Macias California Western School of Law [email protected] (rev. 9/8) In Utilitarian Jurisprudence in America, Peter King held up Thomas Cooper, David Hoffman, and Richard Hildreth, as those early American legal thinkers most notably influenced by Bentham.1 For King, Hildreth represented “the first real fruition of Benthamism in America,” whereas Cooper’s use of Bentham was subservient to his Southern ideology, and Hoffman’s use was mainly to “reinforce” a utilitarianism otherwise “derived from Paley.”2 Although Hildreth’s work falls outside the timeframe of early-American legal science, Cooper’s and Hoffman’s work falls squarely within it. What follows is, in part, a reevaluation of Cooper and Hoffman within the broader context of early republican jurisprudence. Because Cooper became an advocate of southern secession late in life, too many historians have dismissed his life’s work, which consisted of serious intellectual undertakings in law and philosophy, as well as medicine and chemistry. Hoffman, on the other hand, has become a man for all seasons among legal historians. His seven-year course of legal study contained such a vast and eclectic array of titles, that one can superficially paint Hoffman as advocating just about anything. As of late, Hoffman has been discussed as a leading exponent of Scottish Common Sense philosophy, second only to James Wilson a generation earlier. This tension between Hoffman-the-utilitarian and Hoffman-the-Scot requires a new examination. A fresh look at the utilitarian influence on American jurisprudence also requires that we acknowledge 1 PETER J.
    [Show full text]
  • Martin Loughlin Political Jurisprudence
    Martin Loughlin Political jurisprudence Article (Accepted version) (Refereed) Original citation: Loughlin, Martin (2016) Political jurisprudence. Jus Politicum: Revue de Droit Politique, 16 . ISSN 2101-8790 © 2016 Revue internationale de droit politique This version available at: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/67311/ Available in LSE Research Online: August 2016 LSE has developed LSE Research Online so that users may access research output of the School. Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Users may download and/or print one copy of any article(s) in LSE Research Online to facilitate their private study or for non-commercial research. You may not engage in further distribution of the material or use it for any profit-making activities or any commercial gain. You may freely distribute the URL (http://eprints.lse.ac.uk) of the LSE Research Online website. This document is the author’s final accepted version of the journal article. There may be differences between this version and the published version. You are advised to consult the publisher’s version if you wish to cite from it. POLITICAL JURISPRUDENCE MARTIN LOUGHLIN I: INTRODUCTION Political jurisprudence is a discipline that explains the way in which governmental authority is constituted. It flourished within European thought in the period between the sixteenth and nineteenth centuries and since the twentieth century has been in decline. That decline, attributable mainly to an extending rationalization of life and thought, has led to governmental authority increasingly being expressed in technical terms. And because many of the implications of this development have been masked by the growth of an academic disciplinary specialization that sacrifices breadth of understanding for depth of knowledge, sustaining the discipline has proved difficult.
    [Show full text]
  • Robin West, "Jurisprudence and Gender": Defending a Radical
    The University of Chicago Law Review Volume 75 Summer 2008 Number 3 © 2008 by The University of Chicago DEMISESQUICENTENNIAL Robin West, Jurisprudence and Gender: Defending a Radical Liberalism Martha C. Nussbaumt Robin West's Jurisprudenceand Gender' has justly had consider- able influence. West argues persuasively that people concerned with achieving sex equality need to do both practical, political work and theoretical, conceptual work. If the concepts and normative theories remain incompletely developed, they will offer defective guidance to practical work. Therefore, "[f]eminism must envision a post-patriarchal world, for without such a vision we have little direction."2 This conten- tion is both true and important. West then argues that the vision of feminist jurisprudence must be of a world in which all forms of life will be recognized, respected and honored. A per- fect legal system will protect against harms sustained by all forms of life, and will recognize life affirming values generated by all forms of being.... Masculine jurisprudence must become human- ist jurisprudence, and humanist jurisprudence must become a ju- risprudence unmodified.' I find this conclusion a bit underdeveloped: surely a "humanist" juri- sprudence is far from being a jurisprudence in which "all forms of life" t Ernst Freund Distinguished Service Professor of Law and Ethics, Philosophy Department, Law School, and Divinity School, The University of Chicago. 1 Robin West, Jurisprudenceand Gender, 55 U Chi L Rev 1 (1988). 2 Id at 72. 3 Id. The University of Chicago Law Review [75:985 are respected and valued. I would like to know what sorts of respect and recognition animal lives are due in West's conception, and also what forms of respect she would support for nonsentient beings such as plants and ecosystems.
    [Show full text]
  • Hart's Postscript and the Character of Political Philosophy
    Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 24, No. 1 (2004), pp. 1–37 Hart’s Postscript and the Character of Political Philosophy RONALD DWORKIN* Abstract—Several years ago I prepared a point-by-point response to this postscript as a working paper for the NYU Colloquium in Legal, Moral and Political Philosophy. I have not yet published that paper, but I understand that copies of it are in circulation. I do not intend to recapitulate the arguments of that working paper, but instead to concentrate on one aspect of Hart’s Postscript, which is his defence of Archimedean jurisprudence. I shall have something to say about his own legal philosophy, which was a form of legal positivism. But I shall mainly be concerned about the method that he said generated his legal positivism. 1. Archimedeans A. Hart’s Project When Professor H.L.A. Hart died, his papers contained a draft of a long comment about my own work in legal theory, which he apparently intended to publish, when Wnished, as an epilogue to a new edition of his best-known book, The Concept of Law. I have no idea how satisWed he was with this draft; it contains much that he might well not have found fully satisfactory. But the draft was indeed pub- lished as a Postscript to a new edition of the book. In this lecture I discuss the Postscript’s central and most important charge. In The Concept of Law, Hart set out to say what law is and how valid law is to be identiWed, and he claimed, for that project, two important features.
    [Show full text]
  • Therapeutic Jurisprudence Lessons for Law Reformers
    Touro Law Review Volume 18 Number 3 Symposium: The Varieties of Therapeutic Experience Excerpts from the Article 4 Second International Conference on Therapeutic Jurisprudence May 2015 Rights are Not Enough: Therapeutic Jurisprudence Lessons for Law Reformers Nathalie Des Rosiers Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.tourolaw.edu/lawreview Part of the Jurisprudence Commons, and the Legal Profession Commons Recommended Citation Des Rosiers, Nathalie (2015) "Rights are Not Enough: Therapeutic Jurisprudence Lessons for Law Reformers," Touro Law Review: Vol. 18 : No. 3 , Article 4. Available at: https://digitalcommons.tourolaw.edu/lawreview/vol18/iss3/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ Touro Law Center. It has been accepted for inclusion in Touro Law Review by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ Touro Law Center. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Rights are Not Enough: Therapeutic Jurisprudence Lessons for Law Reformers Cover Page Footnote 18-3 This article is available in Touro Law Review: https://digitalcommons.tourolaw.edu/lawreview/vol18/iss3/4 Des Rosiers: Rights Are Not Enough RIGHTS ARE NOT ENOUGH: THERAPEUTIC JURISPRUDENCE LESSONS FOR LAW REFORMERS Nathalie Des Rosiers INTRODUCTION Therapeutic jurisprudence is a movement that examines the psychological effects of laws. It attempts to identify whether the law has healing or detrimental effects. 2 Although it is sometimes framed as a descriptive endeavor and a non-normative project, 3 it suggests that we should seek to minimize the detrimental effects of laws and maximize their healing effects. Ultimately, we want laws to do "more good" or, at least, less harm.
    [Show full text]
  • Law-As-Action and Integrative Jurisprudence Julius Stone
    Hastings Law Journal Volume 26 | Issue 5 Article 8 1-1975 Law-as-Action and Integrative Jurisprudence Julius Stone Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_law_journal Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Julius Stone, Law-as-Action and Integrative Jurisprudence, 26 Hastings L.J. 1331 (1975). Available at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_law_journal/vol26/iss5/8 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Hastings Law Journal by an authorized editor of UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. LAW-AS-ACTION AND INTEGRATIVE JURISPRUDENCEt By JuLIus STONE* FEW exercises are more salutary for the learned than explaining their activities to laymen. What, for example, is jurisprudence? as a radio audience once asked me (I am sure in fullest good faith) in a program allowing sixty seconds for reply. I replied desperately that people who act to interpret or apply the law were lawyers; that those who write or speak about lawyers' activities were jurists; and that those who write or speak about what jurists write or say about law were jurisprudents. The reply made the time-slot, which is, of course, the prime test of good radio. Yet it left out the important genre of which Jerome Hall's Foundations of Jurisprudence is a fine example. For I should really have gone on to say that those who write or speak about what jurisprudents write or say about what jurists write or say about law- yers' activities in interpreting or applying law are also jurisprudents, though of a special kind.
    [Show full text]
  • Law and Morality: a Kantian Perspective
    Columbia Law School Scholarship Archive Faculty Scholarship Faculty Publications 1987 Law and Morality: A Kantian Perspective George P. Fletcher Columbia Law School, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship Part of the Jurisprudence Commons, and the Law and Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation George P. Fletcher, Law and Morality: A Kantian Perspective, 87 COLUM. L. REV. 533 (1987). Available at: https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship/1071 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Publications at Scholarship Archive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of Scholarship Archive. For more information, please contact [email protected]. LAW AND MORALITY: A KANTIAN PERSPECTIVE George P. Fletcher* The relationship between law and morality has emerged as the cen- tral question in the jurisprudential reflection of our time. Those who call themselves positivists hold with H.L.A. Hart' that calling a statute or a judicial decision "law" need not carry any implications about the morality of that statute or decision.2 Valid laws might be immoral or unjust. Those who resist this reduction of law to valid enactments sometimes argue, with Lon Fuller, that moral acceptability is a neces- sary condition for holding that a statute is law; 3 or, with Ronald Dworkin, that moral principles supplement valid enactments as compo- 4 nents of the law. Whether the positivists or their "moralist" opponents are right about the nature of law, all seem to agree about the nature of morality. We have to distinguish, it is commonly said, between conventional and critical morality.
    [Show full text]
  • Jurisprudence of the Committee on the Rights of the Child: a Guide for Research and Analysis
    Michigan Journal of International Law Volume 19 Issue 3 1998 Jurisprudence of the Committee on the Rights of the Child: A Guide for Research and Analysis Cynthia Price Cohen ChildRights International Research Institute Susan Kilbourne ChildRights International Research Institute Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjil Part of the International Humanitarian Law Commons, International Law Commons, Juvenile Law Commons, and the Legal History Commons Recommended Citation Cynthia P. Cohen & Susan Kilbourne, Jurisprudence of the Committee on the Rights of the Child: A Guide for Research and Analysis, 19 MICH. J. INT'L L. 633 (1998). Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjil/vol19/iss3/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Michigan Journal of International Law at University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Michigan Journal of International Law by an authorized editor of University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. JURISPRUDENCE OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD: A GUIDE FOR RESEARCH AND ANALYSISt Cynthia Price Cohen* and Susan Kilbourne** I. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................633 II. CONVENTION ON THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD: BACKGROUND AND CONTENT ......................................................635 III. CHILDRIGHTS JURISPRUDENCE PROJECT .................................642 A . Methodology
    [Show full text]
  • The Continental Shelf and the Extension of the Territorial Sea
    University of Miami Law Review Volume 10 Number 4 Miami Law Quarterly Article 5 7-1-1956 The Continental Shelf and the Extension of the Territorial Sea Dr. Theodore Alvarado Garaioca Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.miami.edu/umlr Recommended Citation Dr. Theodore Alvarado Garaioca, The Continental Shelf and the Extension of the Territorial Sea, 10 U. Miami L. Rev. 490 (1956) Available at: https://repository.law.miami.edu/umlr/vol10/iss4/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Miami Law Review by an authorized editor of University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE CONTINENTAL SHELF AND THE EXTENSION OF THE TERRITORIAL SEA DR. THEODORE ALVARADO GARAIOCA* International Law, influenced by the progress of modern armaments, as well as by the discovery of new natural resources, has had to consider claims tending to modify the traditional determination of the territorial sea, incorporating a new and important element: the so-called continental shelf. It is well to remember that the concept of the "territorial sea" was the subject of a long and arduous discussion. In this inflamed theoretical dispute, several theories were advanced, based upon the opposite principles of the "closed sea" and the "free sea"; the concept of the sea being "rcs nullius" (belonging to nobody) was advanced against the concept of the sea as "res communis" (common to all).
    [Show full text]
  • Framed: Utilitarianism and Punishment of the Innocent
    University at Buffalo School of Law Digital Commons @ University at Buffalo School of Law Journal Articles Faculty Scholarship Fall 2000 Framed: Utilitarianism and Punishment of the Innocent Guyora Binder University at Buffalo School of Law Nicholas J. Smith University of New Hampshire Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.buffalo.edu/journal_articles Part of the Criminal Law Commons, and the Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation Guyora Binder & Nicholas J. Smith, Framed: Utilitarianism and Punishment of the Innocent, 32 Rutgers L.J. 115 (2000). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.buffalo.edu/journal_articles/285 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at Digital Commons @ University at Buffalo School of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal Articles by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ University at Buffalo School of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FRAMED: UTILITARIANISM AND PUNISHMENT OF THE INNOCENT GuyoraBinder*andNicholas J. Smith" I. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................116 II. THE DEBATE OVER PUNISHING THE INNOCENT ...................123................. A. The Charge...................................................................................123 B. Five Responses .............................................................................127 1. Acceptance ...............................................................................127
    [Show full text]
  • The Body Politic from Medieval Lombardy to the Dutch Republic
    _full_journalsubtitle: A Journal for the Study of Science, Technology and Medicine in the Pre-modern Period _full_abbrevjournaltitle: ESM _full_ppubnumber: ISSN 1383-7427 (print version) _full_epubnumber: ISSN 1573-3823 (online version) _full_issue: 1 _full_issuetitle: The Body Politic from Medieval Lombardy to the Dutch Republic _full_alt_author_running_head (neem stramien J2 voor dit article en vul alleen 0 in hierna): 0 _full_alt_articletitle_running_head (rechter kopregel - mag alles zijn): The Body Politic: Introduction _full_is_advance_article: 0 _full_article_language: en indien anders: engelse articletitle: 0 The Body Politic: EarlyIntroduction Science and Medicine 25 (2020) 1-7 1 www.brill.com/esm The Body Politic from Medieval Lombardy to the Dutch Republic: An Introduction Vasileios Syros University of Jyväskylä, Finland [email protected] The content of this special issue is based on three of the presentations de- livered at the international conference “The Body Politic and Social Harmony: From the Middle Ages to the Present.” The event was held on 28 and 29 May 2018 at the Meeting and Conference Center Soeterbeeck in Ravenstein, The Netherlands, under the auspices of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (KNAW), and corresponded with my appointment as KNAW Visit- ing Professor at the Faculty of Philosophy, Theology and Religious Studies at Radboud University Nijmegen during spring 2017 and spring 2018. The body politic metaphor, widely invoked in envisioning various modes of the existence and operation of a harmonious society, has been an enduring feature in the evolution of political thought, both in the “West” and elsewhere. The conference drew upon the cumulative expertise of scholars from different disciplinary backgrounds. It explored iterations of the body politic metaphor and its normative value for conceptions of social and political harmony from the Middle Ages to the present in the European, Islamic, Jewish, Indian, Rus- sian, and East Asian traditions of political theorizing.
    [Show full text]