Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

The Kantian purification of law and politics1

The Kantian purification of law and politics1 Angelaki: journal of the theoretical humanities 3:1 1998 three views of legitimate domination hat is the difference between legitimate Wand illegitimate domination? Broadly speaking the social contract tradition tries to solve this problem with the notion of an agree- ment or a contract. Of course "the social contract tradition" is not one view, it is a variety of com- plex views, but behind the tradition as a whole is an essentially simple thought. If x orders y to give her some object, say a tool, and y does so through fear, then this seems a clear example of illegitimate domination. However if x agrees with y to exchange the tool for something else, then the situation has changed: y cannot, without more, complain that she has lost the tool illegiti- john stanton-ife mately. The agreement in this simple case seems to have altered the normative situation so that both parties have a right to keep what they have acquired as a result of the exchange. This gives THE KANTIAN root to the idea (however it works out in detail) PURIFICATION that legitimacy can somehow be generated from the notion of agreement. OF LAW AND Slightly less roughly, the social http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Angelaki: Journal of Theoretical Humanities Taylor & Francis

The Kantian purification of law and politics1

Download PDF
8 pages

The Kantian purification of law and politics1

Abstract

Angelaki: journal of the theoretical humanities 3:1 1998 three views of legitimate domination hat is the difference between legitimate Wand illegitimate domination? Broadly speaking the social contract tradition tries to solve this problem with the notion of an agree- ment or a contract. Of course "the social contract tradition" is not one view, it is a variety of com- plex views, but behind the tradition as a whole is an essentially simple thought. If x orders y to give her some...
Loading next page...
 
/lp/taylor-francis/the-kantian-purification-of-law-and-politics1-EH4ZNtIxr2
Publisher
Taylor & Francis
Copyright
Copyright Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN
1469-2899
eISSN
0969-725X
DOI
10.1080/09697259808571964
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Angelaki: journal of the theoretical humanities 3:1 1998 three views of legitimate domination hat is the difference between legitimate Wand illegitimate domination? Broadly speaking the social contract tradition tries to solve this problem with the notion of an agree- ment or a contract. Of course "the social contract tradition" is not one view, it is a variety of com- plex views, but behind the tradition as a whole is an essentially simple thought. If x orders y to give her some object, say a tool, and y does so through fear, then this seems a clear example of illegitimate domination. However if x agrees with y to exchange the tool for something else, then the situation has changed: y cannot, without more, complain that she has lost the tool illegiti- john stanton-ife mately. The agreement in this simple case seems to have altered the normative situation so that both parties have a right to keep what they have acquired as a result of the exchange. This gives THE KANTIAN root to the idea (however it works out in detail) PURIFICATION that legitimacy can somehow be generated from the notion of agreement. OF LAW AND Slightly less roughly, the social

Journal

Angelaki: Journal of Theoretical Humanities – Taylor & Francis

Published: Apr 1, 1998

There are no references for this article.