sign in sign up
<<
Home , Negative liberty

Social & Political Philosophy: and

What is liberty? what are rights? what rights and do we have?

A: What is Liberty? : (1820) liberties of the ancients vs liberties of the moderns ancient: a matter of participation in the collective political life modern: peaceful independence Modern liberties: right to be subjected only to the laws not to be detained, arrested, or put to death by the arbitrary will of right to free speech to express one's opinion right to choose a profession and practice it : to use it and even abuse it right to come and go without permission right to free association right to religious belief right to exercise some influence on the administration of government

Ancient Liberty: participation in collective life deliberating in public square but they saw this as compatible with the complete subjection of the to the authority of the community we moderns can no longer enjoy the liberty of the ancients does not allow individual to perceive their influence thus moderns are attached to individual independence security in private pleasures individual liberty is modern liberty political liberty is the guarantee or individual liberty modern liberty threatened by a different danger than ancient liberty danger of ancient liberty was that men might attach too little value to individual rights danger of modern liberty in enjoying our private liberties we surrender too easily our right to share in political power

Constant is exhorting us not to be content with mere private liberties a call to political involvement

* * *

Social & Political Philosophy: Liberty and Rights

Isaiah Berlin (1969): negative liberty: non‐interference, being left alone : achieving a form of self‐mastery warns of the dangers of positive liberty "being forced to be free" begins with explanation of negative liberty political liberty is the area with which a man can act unobstructed by others classical English political philosophers disagreed on how wide the area could or should be but agreed it could not be unlimited area of liberty must be limited by law Locke, Mill, Constant, Tocqueville all agreed there ought to be a certain minimum are of personal which on no account must be violated thus need a boundary between public authority and private life (right to privacy) equality of liberty is the foundation of liberal morality conscience of Western liberals is troubled not by the fact that the freedom men seek differs according to social or economic conditions but by the fact that those who possess freedom may have gained it by exploiting the vast majority who do not liberty in this sense is principally concerned with the area of control not its source a democracy might deprive individuals of many liberties and a despot may allow his subjects a large measure of personal freedom thus no necessary connection between democracy and individual liberty positive liberty derives from the wish to be one's own master vs negative liberty: the freedom from being prevented from choosing as I do by others these notions of liberty developed in divergent directions and eventually came into direct conflict positive liberty historically used to coerce men in the name of some goal coercing others for their own sake Thus Berlin emphasizes one must side with negative liberty when it comes in conflict with positive liberty

* * *

Social & Political Philosophy: Liberty and Rights

Charles Taylor negative liberty inadequate cannot avoid valuing positive freedom freedom can't just be the absence of external constraints cites the examples of Charles Manson and Andreas Baader to illustrate this danger both individuals had a strong sense of some purposes and goals as being more fundamental than others yet they were terribly confused in these extreme cases we recognize that many of us may suffer to a lesser degree from the same confusion thus must value positive liberty

* * *

Ronald Dworkin: we may have rights to many particular liberties but cannot defend the notion of a right to liberty in general begins with Jefferson: , liberty and the pursuit of happiness since Jefferson the right to liberty has received more emphasis than the other two consensus in favor that there is some right to liberty is vast but mistaken analysis of what we mean by a "right" weak sense: a right as a wish, an expression of want strong sense: if someone has a right to something then it is wrong for the government to deny it this is the only sense in which a "right to liberty" would mean very much but then it seems with this sense of right then there cannot be a general right to liberty uses example: if I want to drive up Lexington Ave but the government decides to make it a one way street then it doesn't make sense that I have the "right" to the liberty of driving up Lexington Ave. idea of a right to liberty is a misconception adverse to politcal thought in two ways: 1) creates a false sense of a necessary conflict between liberty and other values 2) provides a too easy answer for why we regard certain kinds of restraints, like the restraint on free speech as especially unjust Social & Political Philosophy: Liberty and Rights

B: Law and Morality two famous exchanges on relation between liberty and the law

J.S. Mill vs James Fitzjames Stephen J.S. Mill: the 'one simple principle' the only justification for interfering with the liberty of another is to prevent that person from harming another Stephen sees appalling consequences in such a principle

Patrick Devlin vs H.L.A. Hart Devlin: one function of law is to uphold common moral standards even at some cost to liberty Hart: moral standards shift such change can be good thus the liberty to challenge accepted standards of morality is necessary

C. Toleration and Free Expression one of the primary liberal virtues is toleration : state has no right to intefere with religious belief and is unable to anyway Thomas Scanlon: state must recognize the rights to free expression for the source of the state's power depends upon the of the individual which requires free expression not always clear what exceeds the bounds of legitimate expression

Jeremy Waldron: considers the Rushdie affair

Catherine Mackinnon: complete can undermine equality

D. Virtue and Citizenship

What are the requirements of citizenship? Is liberty merely being left alone to do what one wants? Social & Political Philosophy: Liberty and Rights

or does it require engagement in public life ancient liberty and positive liberty Pericles free person must also be an active citizen

Aristotle possible to be a good citizen but not a good man Machiavelli decries the modern weakness compared to the ancients

De Tocqueville new forms of servitude have replaced despotism and tyranny

Quentin Skinner

E. Rights the nature and scope of rights many take for granted there are rights scepticism about rights : case against natural rights: 'nonsense on stilts'

Karl Marx: rights of man proclaimed in the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen are merely a protection for individual two contemporaries reassert the case for rights : rights as "side constraints" not to be balanced against other factors in moral decision making

Ronald Dworkin: connects notion of a right to the ideas of dignity and equality

F. Punishment

When is it permissible to treat people in a way that would normally be considered a violation of their rights? most obvious example is punishment how is punishment justified?

J.S. Mill: argues in favor of capital punishment on the twin grounds Social & Political Philosophy: Liberty and Rights

of deterrence and humanity to the criminal

H.L.A. Hart: deterrence and repsonsibility

Robert Nozick against deterrence theories in favour of retribution