Abstract

Legal obligation, the focal notion of this volume, is widely thought to be bound up with the idea of authority; and it is also linked (in ways that depend on one’s conception of legal obligation) with the justifiability of authority, which will be the primary focus of this chapter. In examining the justifiability of authority, particular attention will be given to Robert Wolff’s philosophical anarchist argument and a prominent response in the form of Joseph Raz’s ‘service conception of authority’. Following an introduction, I provide a brief exposition of Wolff’s claim that authority is incompatible with moral autonomy (Sect. 2). After presenting the Razian response to Wolff (Sect. 3), I consider what implications follow from Raz’s service conception of authority assuming it is correct (Sect. 4). I argue that, even if the service conception successfully meets the anarchist challenge, it does so not by entirely dissolving the tension between authority and autonomy, but through a balancing act whereby one aspect of our autonomy is comprised by another aspect of our autonomy. Finally, I consider the service conception of authority itself and point out certain vulnerabilities thereof (Sect. 5).