Nondomination and normativity

Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 88 (3):319–327 (2007)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In an earlier paper, "The Indeterminacy of Republican Policy," I argued that in an important class of cases, republican political theory, as formulated by Philip Pettit, does not have determinate implications for policy. Pettit has replied that my argument was based on a conception of freedom as nondomination that is not his own. In the present paper, I explore the two ways of understanding republican freedom. I first suggest that they may not, in the end, be very different. I then note that if a sharp difference is restored, my conception may have some desirable features.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Republican Moments in Political Liberalism.Anthony Simon Laden - 2001 - Croatian Journal of Philosophy 1 (3):217-237.
Three Concepts of Political Liberty.Kyle Swan - 2003 - Journal of Markets and Morality 6 (1):117-142.
Slaves, Prisoners, and Republican Freedom.Fabian Wendt - 2011 - Res Publica 17 (2):175-192.
Republican freedom and the rule of law.Christian List - 2006 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 5 (2):201-220.
Discourse theory and republican freedom.Philip Pettit - 2003 - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 6 (1):72-95.
Republicanism: a theory of freedom and government.Philip Pettit (ed.) - 1997 - New York: Oxford University Press.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
26 (#595,031)

6 months
1 (#1,510,037)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references