UC San Diego UC San Diego Electronic Theses and Dissertations Title Legitimacy’s Stutter: The Philosophical Anarchist Challenge and Deliberation’s Uncertain Solution Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/2sm1z2q2 Author Ward, Alan Publication Date 2017 Peer reviewed|Thesis/dissertation eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO Legitimacy’s Stutter: The Philosophical Anarchist Challenge and Deliberation’s Uncertain Solution A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science by Alan Ward Committee in charge: Professor Tracy B. Strong, Chair Professor Gerry Mackie, Co-Chair Professor Harvey Goldman Professor Marcel Henaff Professor Andy Lamey 2017 The Dissertation of Alan Ward is approved, and it is acceptable in quality and form for publication on microfilm and electronically: _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ Co-Chair Chair University of California, San Diego 2017 iii DEDICATION Writing a dissertation is hard. I don’t know anyone who successfully wrote one without sometimes feeling as though they were running into a brick wall. Over. And over. And over. But some people made the process less difficult. These are the people who put padding on the wall, bandaged my forehead, and encouraged me to keep banging. This dissertation is dedicated to them. First, thanks go to my committee – Tracy Strong, Gerry Mackie, Harvey Goldman, Marcel Hénaff, and Andy Lamey. The breadth and depth of their knowledge baffles me. At this point I just take for granted that when they speak, whether in a group setting or one-on- one, I’m about to hear something perceptive and liable to force me to rethink some of my positions. Thank you for your professionalism, your help, and for making me smarter. The same goes to Prof. Isaac Balbus, who supervised my Masters thesis at the University of Illinois at Chicago. Ike taught me that it’s possible to be critical while being kind. I also want to thank my grad student cohort and the friends I made in San Diego. My friends Kathryn and Rhys fed me, laughed with me, and made sure I never had to have a pint alone. Rick Malabo helped me clear my jumbled thoughts by going on frequent walks and showing me unrelenting kindness. Marc Rolnik challenged me, but did so as a true friend, providing wine and chocolate as we debated politics. Konstantin Ash entertained and one-upped my ridiculous assertions until our talks reached the level of sublime absurdity. Thanks to Simone Günther, who taught me many lessons, including humility by tying me in a pizza-eating contest. Finally, my relationship with Rachel MacCratic has been a major influence on my thought. She is one of the most outsized and original personalities I met in any field, and I can’t imagine my time in San Diego without her. Thanks go to Dr. Andrew Sward for all the laughs and rants. Sara Wong supported me during the bad times and celebrated with me during the good ones. I cannot thank her enough for being a part of my life. Peninah Rosenblum: you have filled my life with joy and have encouraged me to be a better man. I’m so happy you’re my partner. Thanks to Mark Bigney, whose brilliance and almost frightening uprightness has made him my stock character when discussing intelligence or Kant’s categorical imperative. Luiza Axioti has been a model of integrity and courage. Marc-A has shown me what it means to combine compassion, an analytic mind, and an assertive drive for novelty. In a very real sense, I never would have gone to graduate school had it not been for Marc Peridis, Pirada Chamandy, and Jennifer Teoh. Thank you. Erat, Darc, Jeron: seeing you is always a highlight when I visit Montreal. It wouldn’t be home without you. Thanks for the hospitality and, most of all, the ridiculousness. Finally, this work is especially dedicated to my family. Andrea and Jason: I love and admire both of you. Simone and Gwen: I couldn’t ask for more wonderful nieces. You make being an uncle fun. Mom and dad, thank you so, so much for loving me and teaching me so much. I’m proud to have you as parents. <3 iv TABLE OF CONTENTS SIGNATURE PAGE…………………………………………………………………………iii DEDICATION………………………………………………………………………………..iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ......................................................................................................... v VITA ....................................................................................................................................... viii ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION .............................................................................. ix Chapter 1: The Philosophical Anarchist Challenge.................................................................... 1 I. Legitimate Authority and Philosophical Anarchism ..................................................... 4 II. Types of Philosophical Anarchism ............................................................................... 11 II.1 Wolff and Simmons .................................................................................................... 11 II.2 “My” Country and the Political .................................................................................. 17 III. Simmons vs. Simmons.................................................................................................. 22 IV. Paths Not Taken: Alternative Responses to Simmons .............................................. 27 IV.1 Alternative Responses ............................................................................................... 27 IV.2 Upshot ....................................................................................................................... 32 V. Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 33 Chapter 2: Gratitude ................................................................................................................. 37 I. Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 37 II. Description ..................................................................................................................... 38 II.1. What kind of relationship? Filial vs. Transactional Gratitude ................................... 38 II.2 Psychological and Moral Gratitude ............................................................................ 46 III. Critiques ........................................................................................................................ 49 III.1 Against filial gratitude .............................................................................................. 49 III.2 Intentionality ............................................................................................................. 52 III.3 The Value of Gifts ..................................................................................................... 56 III.4 Goods relative to which bads? Gratitude and counterfactuals .................................. 62 Chapter 3: Fair Play .................................................................................................................. 70 I. Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 70 II. The Hart-Rawls Theory and Its Challenges ................................................................ 70 II.1 Original formulation ................................................................................................... 70 II.2 Objections to the original formulations ...................................................................... 73 III. Klosko’s Theory ........................................................................................................... 76 III.1 Klosko's Three Criteria ............................................................................................. 76 III.2 Discretionary Goods ................................................................................................. 82 IV. Challenges to Klosko .................................................................................................... 87 IV.1 Evil but fair regimes ................................................................................................. 88 IV.2 The reliance on other theories ................................................................................... 92 IV.3 Ambiguous empirical data ........................................................................................ 94 IV.4 Barely acceptable choices and symbolic violence .................................................... 96 V. Green and Reasonable Envy ........................................................................................ .99 VI. Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 103 Chapter 4: Voting and Consent .............................................................................................. 105 I. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 105 II. Consent ........................................................................................................................