Abstract ‘PLATO’S THEORY OF CHANGE: A POPPERIAN RECONSTRUCTION AND ITS SIGNIFICANCE FOR TRADITIONAL AND EMERGING DEMOCRACIES,’ The International Journal of Applied Philosophy, Vol 8 Winter/Spring 1994, No.2. -/- This paper argues that in the midst of the unprecedented actual and potential socio-political and economic changes and transformations in our world toward the end of the 20th Century, the need for some philosophical grounding and guidance has become an imperative if only to avoid a global disaster or change for its own (...) sake. The changes cited include the collapse of the Soviet hegemony and the emergence of pro-democracy movements throughout in Eastern Europe, Latin America, South East Asia, and Africa including the post-Apartheid South Africa. Other changes mentioned include the integration of EEC members into a political unit, the threats from international terrorism, the increasing socio-economic gap and anti-Black racism in the US, and the changes promised by the new US President, Bill Clinton. The paper initiates discussion about the prospect for such a philosophical grounding and guidance by focusing on Plato’s Theory of Change and the possibility of utilizing it as a fulcrum for the ongoing global changes. Following Karl Popper’s lead, (in The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol .I, The Spell of Plato) Plato’s Theory is critiqued on account of its inherent historicism, totalitarianism, and social injustice. Unlike Popper who stops at the criticism however, this paper proceeds with a reconstruction of Plato’s Theory of Change in the light of the criticism as well as the criticism of Popper’s own inaccurate representation of Plato’s Theory. The new theory of change, aptly called, The Plato-Popper Theory of Change is applied to analyzing and theoretically solving or minimizing some of the problems within traditional democracies like the US and Emerging democracies in the Third World. Finally, the paper also presents a challenge to professional philosophers, especially those skilled in ethics and socio-political philosophy, to shift their focus from solving the abstract problems in some possible worlds to solving the real problems of this world in which we live and die. [312 words] . (shrink)

TheFederalist, written by in 1787-1788 in defense of the proposed constitution of the United States, endorses a fundamental principle of political legitimacy: namely, This essay argues that this principlemay be traced back to Plato. Part I of the essay seeks to show that Plato's Statesman offers a clearer understanding of the rule of reason than his more famous Republic, and it also indicates how this principle gave rise to the ideal of constitutionalism, which was adopted and reformulated by Aristotle, Polybius, (...) and Cicero, as well as moderns including Locke and Montesquieu. Part II argues that TheFederalist agrees with Plato when it argues that popular sovereignty must be tempered by the rule of reason. A proper distance should be maintained between the people and the actual exercise of power in order that political decisions be based on reason rather than passion. The people must therefore act through a federal system divided between national government and state governments, and these governments must themselves possess separated powers which control each other by means of checks and balances. Indeed, federalism itself may be viewed as a modern counterpart of Plato's which unites naturally disparate and opposed parts of the city-state into a concordant whole. In declaring, TheFederalist concedes that politics is the art of the possible. But statesmanship is not an exercise in pragmatism devoid of principles. Here shares Plato's vision of politics as a that is, an attempt to approximate the ideal of rational governance as far as possible in ordinary politics. (shrink)

In Republic II Glaucon assigns to Socrates the task of praising justice for itself. What it means to praise justice for itself is unclear. A new interpretation is offered on the basis of an analysis of Glaucon's division of goods. A distinction is developed between criterial benefits, those valuable consequences of a thing which provide a standard for evaluating a thing as a good instance of its type, and fringe benefits, valuable consequences which do not provide such a standard. Socrates (...) is expected to praise justice by describing the benefits it constitutes as a valuable activity of soul. He may also use the criterial benefits of justice but not its fringe benefits. This account of Socrates' task is superior to those interpretations which rule out all use of valuable consequences in praising justice and to those interpretations which fail to preserve the distinction between the second and third classes of goods. (shrink)

Julia Ward Howe, author of the lyrics to “The Battle Hymn of the Republic,” remains known as a poet, abolitionist, and founding member of the antiracist organization American Woman Suffrage Association, but her work on political philosophy and her foundational sense of the necessity for justice and suffrage for all without exception are still unexplored. Howe's speech, “The Position of Women in Plato's Republic” provides a window into the philosophy that shaped the second half of her life and her political (...) organizing. Howe explores problems feminist scholars have often had with Socrates's plans to educate and enfranchise women of the ruling class, analyzes the rhetoric behind Socrates's successful persuasion of reluctant interlocutors, and transforms Plato's arguments into overwhelming rhetorical support for universal suffrage. Howe's intellectual conversion to the cause of suffrage, which occurred later in life and after her support for the 15th Amendment, comes into focus as she wrestles with the questions fundamental to her change of heart: women's moral relationship to human excellence, whether suffrage would destabilize family life, the relationship of gender to divine genderless unity, and the relationship of the Platonic principle of the Good to practical political policy. (shrink)

One issue of contention amongst scholars of the Republic is whether Thrasymachus initially espouses a conventionalist account of justice, according to which just actions are merely those which are lawful; required, or at least allowed, by the laws passed by the ruler of the state. A further question is then whether his initial conceptions of rulers and laws are positivist ones, such that to be a ruler or law of a state is simply determined by the state’s constitution. At 340c (...) Thrasymachus effectively rejects such positivism by placing a condition on being a ruler that one should be exercising the art of ruling and on being a law that it should work to the ruler’s interest. Some have maintained that this works to clarify his initial account and so shows that he was never a positivist about rulers and laws. In this paper I argue against such an understanding of Thrasymachus’ argument and explore the problems which beset the position he is, on my reading, forced into by Socrates’ objection to his opening claim that justice is what is in the interest of the stronger and the argument he first gives to support it. (shrink)

A recent study contends that for Plato, the state, including the ideal state of the Republic, is better governed by unfettered personal authority than by law. The present study maintains that even in the Republic and the Statesman, as well as in the Laws, it is law, not unfettered personal rule that underlies the state. Justification for such authoritarian rule, especially in the ideal state of the Republic, lies in the supposed inability of the ordinary individual to acquire moral autonomy (...) or Platonic justice owing to a lack of the necessary knowledge. But it is shown in this study that the ordinary individual of the ideal state can acquire an educated right opinion sufficient for gaining moral autonomy or Platonic justice. (shrink)

An analysis of the epistemological structure of democratic deliberation as a procedure in which legal norms are constructed reveals that deliberation combines procedural and substantive aspects in a unique and inextricable manner. The co-original recognition of the private and public autonomy of all citizens provides the substantive critical standard against which the justice of norms is measured. At the same time, such recognition requires that the particular needs and values of all people concerned be taken into account. Given the privileged (...) epistemic access people have to their own particular perspective, this requirement implies the ineliminability of actual deliberative procedures. The open-ended nature of these constructive procedures is partly due to the fact that the rules of the procedure are counterfactual and themselves subject to interpretation. More importantly, it also reflects the historical nature of our human world and the freedom of moral persons to shape and reshape their preferences. (shrink)

In 1935, when the U.S. Supreme Court’s new building opened and displayed the phrase “Equal Justice Under Law,” racial segregation was commonplace, as were barriers limiting opportunities for men and women of all colors to participate in economic and political life. The justices on the Court and the lawyers appearing before them reflected those facts; almost all were white men. Today, the Supreme Court’s inscription has become its motto, read as if it always referenced an understanding of equality that has (...) become central to the identity and the legitimacy of courts. The judiciary “looks” somewhat different than it did and, in a sense, has become more “representative” of the range of people appearing in courts. Given the role that courts had played in sustaining discrimination, the impression that courts ought to welcome everyone is a major achievement. Yet, to assess the impact of new judicial demographics requires analysis of other major alterations in U.S. courts—the influx of diverse litigants newly entitled to pursue legal claims; the economic barriers facing many claimants; the emergence of judiciaries as agency-like promoters of agendas; and the displacement of public adjudication through the privatization of dispute resolution. Studies of women as judges focus mostly on their rulings, but probing the “difference that difference makes” requires looking beyond judicial opinions. Courts in the United States have developed structural capacities to propose rules and legislation, create education programs, commission research and task forces, and lobby for resources. When women of all colors and men of color became lawyers and judges, they created affinity organizations and pressed courts to research court-based bias and to revise rules of ethics, doctrine, and practice. Those changes are part of the impact of diversification within the legal profession, as is the backlash against affirmative efforts to reform practices. Another difference of the last decades is that new rights have brought into court many claimants with limited means. Participatory participation remains elusive, while the “justice gap” is pervasive. Worse yet, in some jurisdictions, courts have served as “revenue centers,” using court-imposed assessments as income. Failure to pay “legal financial obligations” can result in suspension of driver’s licenses, the loss of voting rights, and other sanctions levied disproportionately on people who are poor and of color. Instead of being seen as fonts of fairness, courts are coming to be identified as sites of inequality. In addition, many courts have embraced alternative forms of dispute resolution that make both processes and outcomes less visible to the public. Through doctrine and rules, U.S. courts have shifted their own practices as well as enforced mandates imposed on consumers and employers that push them out of court and out of class or joint actions. In sum, the new faces on the bench ought not to obscure that the project of representation, inclusion, and equality is far from complete. The vivid inequalities in courts are problems for courts because such disparities undermine their ability to be places of justice. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:The State by Philip PETTITSteven B. SmithPETTIT, Philip. The State. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2023. 376 pp. Cloth, $39.95The dust-jacket of this book announces a bold claim: “The future of our species depends on the state.” Ever since the Treaty of Westphalia, the state has been regarded as the basic unit of political legitimacy, and yet the state has never ceased to have its critics. From the (...) left, the state has been regarded as failing to realize a normatively appealing ideal of justice that, it is believed, can be achieved only in some form of post-sovereign organization. From the right, the state has been seen as an agent of collectivization that threatens individual liberty and the right to property. Philip Pettit hopes to deflect both of these [End Page 159] complaints in his defense of the state as the indispensable political institution.This is a big and complex book that defies easy summary. Its core attempts to define the nature and limits of the “modern state” even if the term modern and how this differs from other alternative forms of political association is never explored. On Pettit’s realist account, the state will acquire legitimacy, not by holding it to rigorous standards of justice, but if it is able to achieve a rough balance of power between rulers and ruled. This standard does not require equality between the rulers and the ruled or even among the ruled themselves, but it does presuppose the value of stability that is a necessary requisite for any desirable polity. Pettit is, after all, the author of a book on Hobbes, and The State may be seen as an attempt to adapt and update Leviathan.Like Hobbes, Pettit insists that the attainment of political order is a precondition for any possibility of justice. Reversing Rawls’s famous dictum, it is order, not justice, that is the first virtue of social institutions. The author insists that the “functional polity” may fall well short of absolute justice, but this is because the state is related to justice in the way that prudence is related to morality. I wish this point had been more fully developed. It suggests a sphere of political ethics that stands somewhere between Machiavellian power politics and Kantian ideal theory. It suggests that politics requires a degree of prudential flexibility and latitude that cannot be reduced to norms or laws. But how prudence is related to justice, Pettit tantalizingly holds open for another book.The state that Pettit endorses sounds above all like the modern liberal state. The state will serve its ends when it provides for the rule of law that gives each citizen the freedom to act with impunity under legal protection. Sounding like Montesquieu’s famous definition of liberty as “that tranquility of spirit which comes from the opinion each one has of his security,” Pettit suggests that “the fully functional state should give each citizen a reliable, determinate zone of legal security, however limited it may be, within which they can decide on how they want to live their lives.” Isaiah Berlin could not have said it better.The book is divided into two large sections. The first deals with what might be called the metatheory of the state focusing on the rule of law, individual and corporate agency, and a theory of “decentralized” sovereignty. The second part deals with the functions of the state proper. These include the collective power of the people to challenge the sovereign—the best part of the book in my opinion—a defense of individual rights, and the ability of the state to intervene in the economy. Each of these claims, I expect, will give rise to heated debate, but I cannot develop them here.One of the more striking claims of Pettit’s book is the statement that “there has been little work on the theory of the state in the sense in which we pursue it here.” Much may hinge on the meaning of that last phrase, but as for the first part of the sentence, it is literally head scratching. Pettit acknowledges the importance of Bodin, Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and [End... (shrink)

Few have given much thought to how a state of freedom and justice should be organized. This book is the result of the author s 35-year odyssey in search of an answer. He has taken a multi-disciplinary approach, reading widely over many years in the realms of Politics and Economics, Sociology and Philosophy, History and Law. This approach has led to some fresh insights which do not fit into the current left wing/right wing political analysis straitjacket. Comparing the consensus theory (...) of the origin of the state, popularized by Rousseau, with the less well-known conflict theory as expounded by Franz Oppenheimer, the author argues that most states have arisen from the conquest of one class over another, or one tribe over another. Thus the modern state is characterized by a ruling class exercising the coercive power of the state, denying freedom and justice to the rest in varying degrees. Thus the state can be our greatest enemy the 20th century provides plenty of evidence for that. To counter the abuse of power, the author follows the work of Frederic Bastiat in describing a minimal state, limited to the defence of the territory and to maintaining law and order.". (shrink)

When we understand the ontological, political and legal underpinnings associated with the concept of freedom, liberty and rights, we understand the relationship between rights and laws. Rights can be understood as liberties or as laws. Liberties can be understood as de facto rights or as de jure rights. It is de jure rights that are recognized as laws that provide the basis for the rule of law. It is the rule of law that provides the basis for equal rights and (...) equal justice in an ideal republic. Rights, laws and the rule of law are distinct. Rights are self-evident truths. Laws are imperatives backed by sanctions (John Austin). The rule of law is a principle that purports that the recognition de facto and de jure rights provide the basis for political, social and economic justice. People live by the rights recognized by law. As such, the rule of law advocates two fundamental underpinnings in a republic: (1) the recognition of rights as the basis for equal rights and equal justice, and (2) the recognition of law as the basis for governance. (H.L.A. Hart). However, since the recognition of law is the recognition of rights, the recognition of rights precedes the governance by law principle. What is fundamental to the rule of law is that it recognizes rights, legitimizes political rule and administers equal/blind justice (Meyers, 1213). As such, no branch of government can weaponize laws to terminate recognized individual rights. The maxim of the republic should be – while anyone can be the ruler, everyone lives as free as the ruler. Majority rule and protection of self-evident individual rights is fundamental to an ideal republic. Keywords: law, equal rights, equal justice, impunity, rule of law. (shrink)

Modern democracy is impossible without political parties. They are necessary in the process of the construction of the political class and building of relations between politicians and ‘ordinary people’. So, in Poland in the twentieth and the twenty-first centuries the significance of parties is also very important. Their history is older than the history of the reborn Poland. Especially in Galicia, an autonomous province of the Hapsburg empire, we can see the activities of many politicians. A part of them (...) in 1895 declared the birth of the Popular Party which is a constant element of the Polish political scene. The second traditional current is the socialistic movement, which is also always legally active in Poland. These two camps represent, in simplification, the ‘two Polands’—the first more traditional, conservative and provincial, and the second more progressive, ‘European’ and urban. Actually, in the typical consciousness of a Polish citizen, the political representation of the ‘black’ country is the party Law and Justice of Jarosław Kaczyński, and the ‘red’ country admires the Citizen Platform with Donald Tusk as a leader. But probably the idea of a twoparty system, like in the Anglo-Saxon world, is still very distant to reality, because in the European continent, the tradition of pluralism in a policentric version is still very significant. In Poland, even in the period of the ‘real socialism’ this conception of the organization of political life was realized, though naturally in the specific version. There were three legal parties and the Polish United Workers’ Party (the PUWP) was the most important. From 1976, the PUWP in the light of the Constitution had the official hegemony in the Republic. It is possible to compare this situation with the period 1926–39, when, after the coup d’état by Marshal Piłsudski, the Government still won in the election and the official elite wanted to create a stable political force with a perspective of permanent rule. But we must remember that between the wars opposition always was legal. In our times of demoliberalism, this is quite normal (though under the Constitution, unconstitutional parties, for example, communist or fascist, are unacceptable); however, interesting is the fact that when you observe sine ira et studio the evolutional trend of the Polish political system, you easily find the tendency of the ‘stabilization’ of the party system in the way of legal operations. From 1997, the laws concerning political parties have changed the possibilities of the conquest of seats in the Seym. Actually, only the parties having 5 per cent (or 8 per cent in coalition) of votes can gain the representation in the Diet. So it is possible to claim that the little parties today are in a more complicated situation than in the first years after the ‘operation of Round Table’ in 1989. The contemporary system is maybe more stable, but less liberal. There are theoreticians who note the danger of the alienation of the political class in the situation of the renewal of the alienation of the political elite, which de facto is more connected with the state than with the society. Many theoreticians emphasize that in the future the role and the character of political structures will be profoundly different from today. Maybe they are prophets, but we can expect that the Polish political parties or ‘post-parties’ and also political structure as a whole will have many similarities with their actual equivalents, because the mentality of the Polish nation, including the politicians, is more or less enduring. (shrink)

National identity and attachment to national culture have taken root even in this era of globalization. National sentiments find expression in multiple political spheres and cause troubles of various kinds in many societies, both domestically and across state borders. Some of these problems are rooted in history; others are the result of massive global immigration. As US Secretary of State John Kerry tries to broker a new round of Israel-Palestine peace talks, the Israeli government continues expanding its settlements in disputed (...) territories. As this proposal is being written, Japanese citizens are debating whether their politicians should visit the Yasukuni Shrine (靖國神社), where the spirits of fourteen Class A war criminals from WWII and more than one thousand others convicted of war crimes by the International Military Tribunal for the Far East are honored with a distinguished resting place. As the Chinese government’s plan to bring economic prosperity to the Xinjian province unfolds, ethnic conflicts between Han Chinese and local Uyghur Muslims intensify. Tibetans still demonstrate to the Chinese government, some through the dramatic sacrifice of self-immolation, their determination to pursue a Tibet that is truly free and autonomous. The recent inflow of Muslim immigrants across Europa and North America forces those liberal democratic societies to rethink the meaning of multiculturalism. Should the state respect Muslim women’s freedom to wear burkas in public? What about other aspects of certain Muslim traditions such as arranged marriages or the honor killing of teenage girls who see boys their parents do not approve? Since these immigrants voluntarily moved from their homeland to a new society, do they have a duty to give up such practices, which conflict with their new societies’ fundamental commitment to individual autonomy? Eric Hobsbawm suggests that nationalism is a contingent phenomenon in history—it arises with important historical events such as industrialization and print journalism; eventually, it will disappear. Anthony Smith, on the other hand, argues that nationalism is deeply rooted in the human need for collective faith and dignity. How should we understand today’s nationalism? Is it a transient phenomenon that eventually will be eradicated from the world, or is it a timeless issue that confronts and will remain a challenge for every society? Is the conventional distinction between civic and cultural nationalism still relevant or helpful? The problems and ongoing challenges of nationalism are very much alive throughout East Asia where the myth of ethnically and culturally homogeneous nations is still paramount. In addition to the examples provided above, East Asian societies are increasingly multicultural, inevitably forcing their governments to come up with new immigration and border-control policies, revisit their laws regarding labor policies, sociopolitical discrimination, socioeconomic welfare, and, more fundamentally, rethink the constitutional make-up of the citizenry and the ideal of social harmony, one of their most cherished political values. Nevertheless, contemporary theoretical analyses, whether philosophical or empirical, of the phenomena surrounding nationalism, in all its forms, are almost exclusively focused on cases in western cultures and societies, preventing the East Asian people from developing a coherent idea of who they are or should be in a way that can track their deeply-held values and norms (such as Confucianism). One of the primary aims of this conference therefore is to address this ongoing neglect and explore new concepts and theories that are socially relevant in East Asia. Not only will this provide access to the particular experiences of nation, citizenship, and nationalism throughout East Asia but it will bring to bear philosophical concepts, approaches, and styles of reasoning about them that currently are not part of this critical debate. Providing an opportunity to hear these distinct and different East Asian voices and opening up these conceptual and methodological resources to scholars around the world will greatly advance the understanding and appreciation of nationalism. In addition to this primary aim, the proposed conference will achieve two other, novel, and important goals. First, by design, it will bring to bear a multi and interdisciplinary approach to the problems of nationalism. We are not privileging either conceptual or empirical studies in the organization of our conference and will bring together philosophers, political scientists, sociologists, and historians, making every effort to invite scholars who explicitly employ or are interested in exploring different and at times hybrid approaches. Second, we will draw together scholars from around the world: China, South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, North America, and Europe, including leading figures in the field, who will serve as keynote speakers for the conference. Combining these two additional goals will enable us to organize a uniquely diverse conference, both in terms of intellectual discipline and national origin. Along with our primary aim of introducing East Asian voices and theories, this will make our event original, distinctive, and unprecedented in value. Our age is one in which it is unavoidable for people of different cultural backgrounds to live together in many different places. For the sake of justice and stability, a comprehensive re-examination of nationalism is both urgent and necessary. (shrink)

The _Statesman _is a difficult and puzzling Platonic dialogue. In _A Stranger's Knowledge_ Marquez argues that Plato abandons here the classic idea, prominent in the _Republic_, that the philosopher, _qua_ philosopher, is qualified to rule. Instead, the dialogue presents the statesman as _different _from the philosopher, the possessor of a specialist expertise that cannot be reduced to philosophy. The expertise is of how to make a city resilient against internal and external conflict in light of the imperfect sociality of human (...) beings and the poverty of their reason. This expertise, however, cannot be produced on demand: one cannot train statesmen like one might train carpenters. Worse, it cannot be made acceptable to the citizens, or operate in ways that are not deeply destructive to the city’s stability. Even as the political community requires his knowledge for its preservation, the genuine statesman must remain a stranger to the city. Marquez shows how this impasse is the key to understanding the ambiguous reevaluation of the rule of law that is the most striking feature of the political philosophy of the _Statesman_. The law appears here as a mere approximation of the expertise of the inevitably absent statesman, dim images and static snapshots of the clear and dynamic expertise required to steer the ship of state across the storms of the political world. Yet such laws, even when they are not created by genuine statesmen, can often provide the city with a limited form of cognitive capital that enables it to preserve itself in the long run, so long as citizens, and especially leaders, retain a “philosophical” attitude towards them. It is only when rulers know that they do not know better than the laws what is just or good that the city can be preserved. The dialogue is thus, in a sense, the vindication of the philosopher-king in the absence of genuine political knowledge. (shrink)

Public law adjudication has grown dramatically in recent decades in many English-speaking countries. In the United States, and increasingly in other countries where it used to be rare for public questions to be decided in court, controversial questions of public policy are tried as constitutional or human rights issues and decided by court order. But in other areas of law - in everyday tort, contract, and property cases - court decisions are typically much less dramatic and seldom if ever announce (...) controversial innovations in public policy. Yet in private law cases too there are implicit questions of social justice.In common law countries, perhaps not surprisingly, tort, contract, and other private law cases are often decided on common law principles. Common law has a style and ethos of its own. It is based on precedent and, although precedent is open to modification, the common law style is anything but radical. With roots in the nineteenth century and earlier, common law often reflects classically liberal ideas, more or less consciously and more or less robustly.Instead of approaching private law cases with a common law mindset, should judges not treat these cases the way they might treat public law cases? Should courts not promote a vision of justice and human rights through private law adjudication, just as they sometimes - and in many countries increasingly - do in notable public law decisions?This article suggests several reasons why they should not. Turning private law more public in such a way would have considerable costs in legal stability, transparency, legitimacy, and judicial habits of neutrality and impartiality. Each of these considerations in turn is associated with what is generally thought of as the Rule of Law. The classically liberal ideas in the common law bloodstream themselves have at least some association with political freedom and the Rule of Law. And even if one is sceptical about classical liberalism and enthusiastic about today's public law, one might consider that public acceptance of ambitious public law adjudication may depend at least in part on the credit that courts build up through morally and politically unambitious day-to-day common law adjudication. (shrink)

In the center of the fifth book of the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle elliptically characterizes political justice as a form of reciprocal rule that exists between free and equal persons pursuing a common life directed toward self-sufficiency under the rule of law. My dissertation analyzes Aristotle's thematic treatments of political justice in the Nicomachean Ethics and Politics in order to elucidate its meaning, clarify its relationship to the other forms of justice that he also discusses, and compare it to contemporary neo-Aristotelian (...) accounts of justice. ;The first chapter examines the unclear and disputed passages of Ethics V.6--7 and explains why Aristotle discusses political justice in his ethical treatise. The second chapter makes use of Aristotle's juxtaposition of political justice to household justice on the one hand and despotic justice on the other hand in order to explicate the necessary conditions of political justice, namely, freedom, equality, commonality, self-sufficiency, and the rule of law. To make sense of these concepts, the chapter explores such topics as Aristotle's understanding of the household, his notion of the self and his political criticisms of Socrates. The third chapter examines political justice or reciprocal rule in the Politics in order to understand how political justice can be both a human virtue and an institutional arrangement of offices. The fourth chapter offers a critique of Fred Miller's reconstruction of Aristotelian natural rights. Although Miller is correct to say that Aristotle recognized and understood "rights claims," he is mistaken in claiming that they are an integral part of Aristotle's practical philosophy. Aristotle understood the problems for political compromise posed by rights conceived as "trumps," and he rejects rights as philosophically fundamental on the grounds that they are an inadequate solution to both the political problem of justice and the stability of flourishing political institutions. (shrink)

Farrington has written a fascinating and provocative introduction to fourth-century Greece in the form of a cultural dispute between the Garden, the Academy, and the Lyceum. In the political and religious chaos of the late fourth century, Epicurus appears as a radical social reformer, not the recluse of earlier interpreters, bent on returning Greek society to its primitive ideal of friendship. While in agreement with Plato that Greek society was desperately sick, his remedy was antithetical to Plato's and heavily dependent (...) on the later Aristotle. Friendship not justice, freedom not authority, individuality not universality, sensory experience not a priori axioms--these were the hallmarks of Epicurus' desired reform. The practical, almost prophetic direction of Epicurus' philosophy emerges most clearly in his bitter opposition to political religion, used by the ruling class to keep the people in line and typified by Plato's insistence on religious orthodoxy in his republic. Against this background, Epicurus' theology, as well as his physics, serves as a polemical thrust designed to release men from superstition and irrational fear of would-be gods. Farrington's obvious delight in Epicurus, together with his desire to set right past misinterpretations of his thought, make the account all the more interesting to read. The final chapter traces Epicurean influence in later Roman thought, notably in the Platonist Cicero and the Stoic Seneca, its decline in the Middle Ages, and its rebirth in the Renaissance. The book concludes with a brief but adequate bibliography of ancient and modern works.--J. G. G. (shrink)

The rule of law is a valuable human achievement. It is valuable not only instrumentally, but also for its own sake as a significant aspect of social justice. Only in a society that enjoys the rule of law is it possible for people to regard one another as fellow free citizens; no one the master of anyone else. Nevertheless, the rule of law is poorly understood. In this book, Frank Lovett develops a rigorous conception of the rule of law that (...) is grounded in legal positivism, and offers a civic republican argument for its value in terms of freedom from domination. Bridging persistent methodological gaps that divide legal philosophy, social science, and political theory, Lovett demonstrates how insights from all three can be united in a single powerful theory. This book will appeal to anyone interested in the rule of law, including scholars, legal officials, and policy-makers. (shrink)

A new reading of Plato’s political thought Plato famously defends the rule of knowledge. Knowledge, for him, is of the good. But what is rule? In this study, Melissa Lane reveals how political office and rule were woven together in Greek vocabulary and practices that both connected and distinguished between rule in general and office as a constitutionally limited kind of rule in particular. In doing so, Lane shows Plato to have been deeply concerned with the roles and relationships between (...) rulers and ruled. Adopting a longstanding Greek expectation that a ruler should serve the good of the ruled, Plato’s major political dialogues—the Republic, the Statesman, and Laws—explore how different kinds of rule might best serve that good. With this book, Lane offers the first account of the clearly marked vocabulary of offices at the heart of all three of these dialogues, explaining how such offices fit within the broader organization and theorizing of rule. Lane argues that taking Plato’s interest in rule and office seriously reveals tyranny as ultimately a kind of anarchy, lacking the order as well as the purpose of rule. When we think of tyranny in this way, we see how Plato invokes rule and office as underpinning freedom and friendship as political values, and how Greek slavery shaped Plato’s account of freedom. Reading Plato both in the Greek context and in dialogue with contemporary thinkers, Lane argues that rule and office belong at the center of Platonic, Greek, and contemporary political thought. (shrink)

An argument for why Plato’s Laws can be considered his most important political dialogue In Plato's Second Republic, André Laks argues that the Laws, Plato’s last and longest dialogue, is also his most important political work, surpassing the Republic in historical relevance. Laks offers a thorough reappraisal of this less renowned text, and examines how it provides a critical foundation for the principles of lawmaking. In doing so, he makes clear the tremendous impact the Laws had not only on political (...) philosophy, but also on modern political history. Laks shows how the four central ideas in the Laws—the corruptibility of unchecked power, the rule of law, a “middle” constitution, and the political necessity of legislative preambles—are articulated within an intricate and masterful literary architecture. He reveals how the work develops a theological conception of law anchored in political ideas about a god, divine reason, that is the measure of political order. Laks’s reading opens a complex analysis of the relationships between rulers and citizens; their roles in a political system; the power of reason and persuasion, as opposed to force, in commanding obedience; and the place of freedom. Plato's Second Republic presents a sophisticated reevaluation of a philosophical work that has exerted an enormous if often hidden influence even into the present day. (shrink)

Article 2: The Republic of Poland shall be a democratic state ruled by law and implementing the principles of social justice....Article 7: The organs of public authority shall function on the basis of, and within the limits of, the law. Constitution of the Republic of Poland, April 2, 1997Chapter 1, Article 1: The Slovak Republic is a democratic and sovereign state ruled by the law. It is bound neither to an ideology, or to a religion. Constitution of Slovakia, September 1, (...) 1991Chapter 1, Article 1: The Czech Republic is a sovereign, unified and democratic law-observing state, based on the respect for the rights and freedoms of the individual and citizen. Constitution of the Czech Republic, December 16, 1992Preamble: We, the members of the Seventh Grand National Assembly, guided by our desire to express the will of the people of Bulgaria...hereby promulgate our resolve to create a democratic, law-governed and social state, by establishing this CONSTITUTION. Constitution of Bulgaria, July 12, 1991. (shrink)

This book tells an overlooked story in the history of the will, a contested idea in both politics and philosophy of mind. For it is Cicero, statesman and philosopher, who gives shape to the notion of will as it would become in Western thought and who invents the idea of 'the will of the people'. In a single word – voluntas – he brings Roman law in contact with Greek ideas, chief among them Plato's claim that a rational elite must (...) rule. When the republic falls to Caesarism, Cicero turns his political argument inward: will is a force to win the virtue in the soul that was lost on the battlefield, the marker of inner freedom in an unfree age. Though his vision of a free republic failed in his time, Cicero's ideal of rational elitism has shaped and fractured the modern world – and Ciceronian creativity may yet save it. (shrink)

The people's‐led Separatist movement was justified as an effort to bring about self‐determination, freedom, and justice for marginalized planets that did not feel represented by the Republic. The same spirit of resistance of the Separatist movement can also be found in the citizens of the Republic itself. The Clone Wars depicts the dangers and costs of endless militarism and highlights problems with the Jedi. Cornel West discusses the ways democratic traditions and values are under threat in the US, highlighting three (...) dogmas that seriously threaten democratic sensibilities: free‐market fundamentalism, aggressive militarism, and escalating authoritarianism. In the Clone Wars episode “Sabotage,” the end of the war is near, and the Republic's increasing militarization foreshadows its transition to the Empire. With Admiral Tarkin in command, the Republic becomes more ruthless in carrying out the war effort. (shrink)

This essay claims that ‘access to justice’ has erroneously been assumed to be synonymous with invisible concepts instead of access to a lawyer’s language. The Paper outlines how a language concerns the relation between signifiers, better known as word-images, on the one hand, with signfieds, better known as concepts, on the other. The signifieds are universal, artificial and empty in content. Taking the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms as an example, officials have assumed that Charter knowledge has involved signifieds (...) (such as rules, principles, doctrines and tests) as if the signifiers were transparent. But any one signifier differs from another signifier without the lawyer ever accessing the invisible signifieds. Ironically, although the lawyer, law professor or law student believes that s/he is studying legal ‘practice’ and although legal knowledge has been considered a matter of signified concepts, the knowledge has really concerned the differentiating relations of signifiers. As a consequence, the moment of accessing the concepts (signifieds) has been forever deferred. ‘Access to justice’ has become access to the special language of signifiers, a language which lawyers alone are privileged to enforce. Turning to the Charter, lawyers claiming to know the special Charter language became indispensable to social life. Even the meaning-constituting human subject became a signifier, better known as ‘the legal person’ defined by Charter rights. Charter language, however, has deferred an access to the invisible concepts such as ‘freedom’ or ‘democracy’, terms in Section of the text. Access to justice’ has become access to the language of the privileged class of lawyers. The lawyer’s language has become a theoretical language in the name of access to justice. And yet, because the theoretical language has been propagated as concerned with ‘practice’, it has been difficult to challenge the social-cultural content of the language of lawyers. (shrink)

James Wilson (1742-1798), lawyer, Justice of the first Supreme Court of the United States, and Constitutional Framer argued, as did Étienne Gilson, that a citizenry who have adopted philosophical skepticism will lose their political freedom, as self-rule requires that citizens be able to reason rightly about the natural law. He advocated a common sense philosophical education in natural law for all lawyers, so that they might know the first principles of moral reasoning.

Plato’s theory of justice is central in philosophical discourse. The canon of this theory is that every individual has an innate ability that can be harnessed to contribute to national development. Plato is of the view that grounding human ability in departmental excellence will promote a division of labour and enhance productivity, efficiency and effectiveness.Plato’s defense of justice is an attempt to correct the position of the sophists that injustice is preferred to justice. The Republic (Ideal state), one of his (...) greatest dialogues, demonstrates the necessity of adopting a universal notion of justice as an instrument of social and moral regulation.Justice means one man, one job based on ones capacity and capability. Criticisms have trailed this theory as the forerunner of authoritarianism and despotism. The strongest criticism sees Plato’s paradigm as the enemy of the open society as a result of the strict division of society into dominant classes. (shrink)

The original essays in this volume discuss ideas relating to democracy, political justice, equality and inequalities in the distribution of resources and public goods. These issues were as vigorously debated at the height of ancient Greek democracy as they are in many democratic societies today. Contributing authors address these issues and debates about them from both philosophical and historical perspectives. Readers will discover research on the role of Athenian democracy in moderating economic inequality and reducing poverty, on ancient debates about (...) how to respond to inborn and social inequalities, and on Plato’s and Aristotle’s critiques of Greek participatory democracies. Early chapters examine Plato’s views on equality, justice, and the distribution of political and non-political goods, including his defense of the abolition of private property for the ruling classes and of the equality of women in his ideal constitution and polis. Other papers discuss views of Socrates or Aristotle that are particularly relevant to contemporary political and economic disputes about punishment, freedom, slavery, the status of women, and public education, to name a few. This thorough consideration of the ancient Greeks' work on democracy, justice, and equality will appeal to scholars and researchers of the history of philosophy, Greek history, classics, as well as those with an interest in political philosophy. (shrink)

This dissertation advances the thesis that modern political freedom has an aporetical relation to the possibility of its own foundation. In the first volume, I examine how Machiavelli establishes the internal relation between political freedom and historical contingency that gives rise to the non-foundational concept of political freedom in early modernity. Far from reducing politics to the activity of providing secure foundations for the state, Machiavelli elaborates a conception of politics torn by the antinomical tasks of giving political freedom its (...) reality in the "form" of the state, and of restoring the anti-realist character of this ungroundable freedom in the "event" of the republic. These two irreducible poles of modern political life correspond to the basic political difference between the process of securing rule and the affirmation of a space of no-rule, where a common political existence is led in the absence of domination. ;The second volume illustrates how the historicist and anti-foundational character of modern political freedom can illuminate the situation of late modernity, viewed politically. The first trait of this situation is revealed by the problematic, yet inescapable, synthesis of political philosophy and philosophy of history. By exploring the reasons for, and the limits of, this synthesis I provide a new interpretation of the complementary ideas that freedom has a history and that history is the history of freedom in view of elaborating a postmetaphysical concept of political freedom. The second trait of the situation of modernity consists in the permanent possibility of situating politically the validity of norms, thereby putting into question the link between morality and metaphysically consolidated principles. Focusing on the contemporary debate over the tension between the validity of a norm and its application to a given situation, I argue that the erosion of metaphysical grounds for the determination of what is right corresponds to the priority assigned to political freedom over justice. This priority is manifest by the fact that, in the situation of modernity, the very difference between fact and norm is drawn on the site of politics conceived as an uncircumventable conflict of interpretations. (shrink)

Is there such a thing as information justice? In this paper, I argue that the current state of the information economy, particularly as it regards information and computing technology (ICT), is unjust, conferring power disproportionately on the information-wealthy at great expense to the information-poor. As ICT becomes the primary method for accessing and manipulating information, it ought to be treated as a foundational layer of the information economy. I argue that by maximizing the liberties (freedom to use, freedom to distribute, (...) freedom to modify, and so on) associated with certain computer software, an incentives-rich and stable environment can be established in ICT that will foster development of the information economy among the information poor. I suggest that the now-mature Free and Open Source Software paradigm, which has already produced widely-used enterprise-class applications, can be harnessed in support of these ends. (shrink)

Archytas of Tarentum, a contemporary and associate of Plato, was a famous Pythagorean, mathematician, and statesman of Tarentum. Although his works are lost and most of the fragments attributed to him were composed in later eras, they nevertheless contain valuable information about his thought. In particular, the fragments of On Law and Justice are likely based on a work by the early Peripatetic biographer Aristoxenus of Tarentum. The fragments touch on key themes of early Greek ethics, including: written and unwritten (...) laws; freedom and self-sufficiency; moderation of the emotions and cultivation of virtues; equality and the competence of the majority to participate in government; criticism of “rule by an individual”; a theory of the ideal “mixed constitution”; distributive and corrective justice and punishment, and of the rule of law. The fragments also contain one of the only positive accounts of democracy in ancient Greek philosophy. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:The Ambedkar-Gandhi Debate: On Identity, Community and Justice by Bindu PuriMeena Dhanda (bio)The Ambedkar-Gandhi Debate: On Identity, Community and Justice. By Bindu Puri. Singapore: Springer, 2022. Pp. xv + 266, Paper $119.90, ISBN 978-981-16-8685-6.Written from a philosophical perspective, this ambitious book by Professor Bindu Puri draws attention to an old and well know opposition between two great minds of the last century. The distance between Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi (...) (1869--1948) and Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar (1891--1956) surfaced in the political domain when both were engaged in challenging British colonial rule in their respective, unique, and often opposing ways. Faced with a common enemy from whom political independence was sought, both Indian leaders battled with each other to define the meaning of that independence for the masses they represented. How would independence from the British bring freedom and equality to the most underprivileged? Both drew on their understanding of India’s past: Gandhi at pains to revise, reform, and rewrite his complex inheritance with an eye to continuity, and Ambedkar labouring to extract and underline the undeniable, inescapable core, the scourge of caste, which the republic of India would have to break from if genuine freedom and equality were to become attainable goals.Puri’s book addresses these conflicting notions of the past and builds two incommensurable world views underpinning their political positions, thus presenting the political and intellectual rivalry between Gandhi and Ambedkar as ultimately irreconcilable. Their world views are distilled by defining the relationship between underlying conceptions of the self, community and justice. These form the foci of five chapters, each elaborating the difference between the two thinkers. A broad framework of a binary opposition between the “modern” (Ambedkar) and the “Indic” (Gandhi), inspired by authors like D.R. Nagraj and Ashish Nandy, is followed, occasionally allowing for seepage of common elements from one to the other. It is a significant feature of their life histories that both Gandhi and Ambedkar were trained as lawyers, both studied outside British India, and both returned to practice law in British India. In my view, their “modern” training shaped the argumentative methods deployed by both, albeit, when writing in the vernacular, Ambedkar (in Marathi) and Gandhi (in Gujarati), both used appeals to “native” intelligence in dissimilar ways. Ambedkar did not spare the sphere of the “sacred” from critical scrutiny, whereas Gandhi was careful to protect the “sacred” from criticism. [End Page 1]The book makes extensive use of a distinction between “itihaas” and history, borrowed from an essay by Ajay Skaria (2010), “The Strange Violence of Satyagraha: Gandhi, Itihaas, and History.” Both notions are meant to encapsulate the “past,” but apparently in different ways. This crucial distinction, stressing on the meaning of “itihaas” as “it so happened” introduced in Chapter 1 (p. 2) is followed by its extensive deployment in Chapter 2 (pp. 25-53), where Skaria’s essay is first referenced (p. 33). Many of the key references to Gandhi’s writings in this chapter are strikingly identical with those used by Skaria (2010). He, however, has used his own translations of the original Gujarati text of Hind Swaraj into English, carefully explaining the differences between his and Gandhi’s translations into English, but Puri has relied on either the Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi or Hind Swaraj and Other Writings (ed. Anthony Parel). A long quotation from Veyne (1984) seems to be taken from Skaria’s essay—all the ellipses are exactly where Skaria placed them. The interlinkages between key Gandhian concepts—e.g., between satyagraha and atmabal; the importance of “singularity” for itihaas; khaas lakshan and humanity; unilateral obligation (ekpakshi farj); ownmost orientation (swabhava)—are all found in Skaria (2010). The reliance on Ajay Skaria’s interpretations of Gandhi’s idea of samadarshan (seeing things with an equal eye), especially in the context of the Bhagwad Gita continues in chapter 4 (pp. 152-160), in her discussion of “absolute equality,” only this time it is with reference to Skaria’s (2016) Unconditional Equality: Gandhi’s Religion of Resistance.The comparison of Gandhi’s reading of the Gita with orthodox readings by Tilak and Ramanujan (apparently also derived from... (shrink)

The warriors are a troublesome addition to the city founded by Socrates. Continuous supervision and a heavy-handed pedagogy are required just to keep them from oppressing the producing class. They also never accomplish the mission they initially are given — the violent taking of adjacent lands. So why are they summoned and set up in power? For that matter, why is spiritedness cultivated instead of discouraged or suppressed? The above questions indicate that there is a case to be made (...) against warriors in the city and spiritedness in the soul. After making that case, the paper turns to constructing a defence of each, noting their respective contributions to civic defence and self-preservation, political justice and moral development, and the rule of philosophers and the life of the mind. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:85, LEGAL OBLIGATION IN HUME There is one aspect of the thought of David Hume that seems to me to be important and topical, especially if considered in relation to two reductionist and dogmatic tendencies that are still noticeable in the general theory of law. By dogmatic I understand conceptions that are insufficiently founded on experience. The first of these two dogmatic tendencies is the emphasis placed on the (...) notion of sanction which is viewed by some as prevailing over the concept of obligation to the point of absorbing it within itself. Law is that which the superior bodies of the dominant class impose. This doctrine has been affirmed even recently. But the master example is given by Bentham. To say that a man has the obligation to behave in a certain way is equivalent to saying that if he does not behave so, he will experience pain (or the absence of pleasure). Legal sanction is the source from which this pain comes. Thus Bentham goes so far as to say that pain is constitutive of 2 obligation in all its forms. This seems to be contrary to experience and common sense. In fact, one can observe a legal obligation independently of the consideration of the consequences inherent in its violation. For this and other reasons the doctrinal tendency to give prevalence to the notion of sanction over the notion of obligation does not take account of experience and is dogmatic. Against this dogmatism one observes even today that the concept of an obligation that arises from a constriction, the concept 3 of Zwangspflicht, is a contradictio in adjecto. Nevertheless, in order to avoid the contradiction inherent in the prevalence of sanction over obligation and the dependence of law on political power and on the power of those who command, it is easy to fall into a second and opposite dogmatism. This second dogmatism consists in affirming the existence of fundamental legal obligations deducible from a priori principles understood platonically 86. as Ol·(fO- T"*) WVXt\S and as vision of the mind. But demonstrative reason, so understood, is determined exclusively through relations of ideas which, in Hume's opinion, cannot themselves constitute legal obligation. A legal system requires modifications and limitations to the passions and interests of individuals. As is well known, Hume argues that a passion and an interest cannot be modified by selfevident rational principles. No criterion that is deducible from demonstrative reason can function as a guide to human behaviour. Now between the two dogmatisms to which I have referred, Hume represents a third way on the basis of experience and of common sense. The advantage offered by Hume's thought is that of showing both the distinction between and the complementary nature of legal obligation and sanction. In what follows I shall discuss what I consider to be the kernel of Hume's legal theory as contained in his conception of human nature, setting aside secondary elements that do not directly concern the subject proposed. First: A legal system is not conceivable without setting up fundamental legal rules which, in Hume's opinion are the rules of justice. Consequently, the discussion of law implies the discussion of justice. And the discussion of justice is part of legal theory. Here I restrict my consideration to the obligations that are expressed by fundamental legal rules which are: stability of possession transference of possession by consent, and performance of promises. We know that, according to Hume, such rules cannot be derived from demonstrative or a_ priori reason but are revealed to empirical knowledge. Second: Hume distinguishes between the setting up of legal obligation and the moral evaluation of the legal obligation. In order to grasp the peculiarity of legal obligation as compared with moral evaluation, I refer here to the constitution of legal obligation. In order to understand the third book of the Treatise, it is in my 87. opinion absolutely necessary to take into account the distinction between the setting up of the legal obligation and its moral evaluation. Third: The obligations expressed in fundamental legal rules do not arise through a natural inclination but by artifice or by convention. The concept of artifice implies in Hume... (shrink)

RESUMO: Na época em que Shakespeare escolheu Veneza para cenário de Otelo e O Mercador de Veneza, a cidade-república correspondia aos ideais renascentistas de liberdade e estabilidade. Descobertas no âmbito da geografia e da astronomia exigiam uma reavaliação do lugar ocupado por mulheres e homens na nova concepção do universo. Este ensaio pretende refletir sobre a Veneza mítica do imaginário shakespeariano, uma paisagem simbólica, menos física e concreta que ideológica. Nesse sentido, o trabalho recorre ao conceito foucauldiano de heterotopia para (...) ilustrar como, na representação da cidade, se projetavam os anseios de uma época. Aqui, a jurisprudência é de importância central. PALAVRAS-CHAVE: Shakespeare, Mercador de Veneza, Renascimento, Veneza, heterotopia, jurisprudência In the storied city: justice and other conflicts of The Merchant of Venice ABSTRACT: When Shakespeare chose Venice as the location for Othello and The Merchant of Venice, the republic corresponded to Renaissance ideals of freedom and stability. Discoveries in the realm of geography and astronomy required a re-evaluation of the place occupied by women and men in the new conception of the universe. This essay intends to discuss the mythical Venice of Shakespeare’s imagination, a symbolic landscape, less physical and concrete than ideological. In this sense, this paper turns to Foucault’s concept of heterotopia to illustrate how the anxieties of an epoch were projected in the representation of the city. Here, jurisprudence is of central importance. KEYWORDS: Shakespeare, The Merchant of Venice, Renaissance, Venice, heterotopia, jurisprudence En la ciudad historiada: justicia y otros conflictos del Mercader de Venecia RESUMEN: En la época en que Shakespeare escogió Venecia como escenario de Otelo y El Mercader de Venecia, la ciudad-república correspondía a los ideales renacentistas de libertad y estabilidad. Los descubrimientos en el ámbito de la geografía y de la astronomía exigían una reevaluación del lugar ocupado por mujeres y hombres en la nueva concepción del universo. Este ensayo pretende reflexionar sobre la Venecia mítica del imaginario shakespeariano, un paisaje simbólico, menos físico y concreto que ideológico. En este sentido, el trabajo recurre al concepto foucauldiano de heterotopía para ilustrar cómo, en la representación de la ciudad, se proyectaban los anhelos de una época. Aquí, la jurisprudencia es de central importancia. PALABRAS CLAVE: Shakespeare, Mercader de Venecia, Renacimiento, Venecia, heterotopía, jurisprudencia. (shrink)

Velho Testamento Deus expressa, através do profeta Samuel, idéias sobre o governo humano, similares às de Sócrates na República de Platão. Ambos defendem que a melhor organização política é aquela na qual nenhuma pessoa ou classe domina, mas aquela onde cada um rege a si mesmo através de um princípio interno de justiça. Uma “anarquia” justa deste tipo não é apenas a melhor, mas também possível de ser alcançada. Ao menos em certos períodos os filhos de Israel a obtiveram. Deveríamos (...) imitá-los.In the Old Testament God expresses, through the prophet Samuel, views about human government that are very like those expressed by Socrates in Plato's Republic. Both maintain that the best political arrangement is where no one person or class rules but where each rules himself through an inner principle of justice. A just 'anarchy' of this sort is not only best; it is also possible of attainment. At least for certain periods the children of Israel attained it. We should imitate them. (shrink)

Niccolo Machiavelli lived in a fiercely competitive world, one where brute wealth, brazen liars and ruthless self-promoters seemed to carry off all the prizes; where the wealthy elite grew richer at the expense of their fellow citizens. In times like these, many looked to crusading religion to solve their problems, or they turned to a new breed of leaders - super-rich dynasties like the Medici or military strongmen like Cesare Borgia; upstarts from outside the old ruling classes. In the republic (...) of Florence, Machiavelli and his contemporaries faced a choice: should they capitulate to these new princes, or fight to save the city's democratic freedoms? Be Like the Fox follows Machiavelli's dramatic quest for political and human freedom through his own eyes. Masterfully interweaving his words with those of his friends and enemies, Erica Benner breathes life into his penetrating, comical, often surprising comments on events. Far from the cynical henchman people think he was, Machiavelli emerges as his era's staunchest champion of liberty, a profound ethical thinker who refused to compromise his ideals to fit corrupt times. But he did sometimes have to mask his true convictions, becoming a great artist of fox-like dissimulation: a master of disguise in dangerous times. (shrink)

This article traces the development of European ideas of peace and unity from the time of Desiderius Erasmus to Immanuel Kant. The argument will be made that these ideas, which were initially strongly determined by Christian religious thinking, gradually changed, and from the seventeenth century onwards were put forward in more political and legal terms. Erasmus's way of reasoning about peace and war was still strongly influenced by his firm orientation on the New Testament and the teachings of Jesus Christ. (...) Emeric Crucé, a French writer, was of the opinion that all human beings in the end had God in common, and so had to live peacefully together. Duc de Sully was one of the first not to argue as a religious man but as a politician: a system of balance of power could bring international stability. According to the English Quaker William Penn and the French Abbé de Saint-Pierre only the acceptance of international rules of justice could produce everlasting peace. Immanuel Kant finally directed attention to the form of government and to the founding of a federation of free republics. So God seems to have disappeared from Europe???but with what consequences for today? (shrink)

Hegel's interpretation of Plato's political thought provides the principal illustration of his metaphilosophy. However, Hegel has been criticized for imposing his own metaphilosophical agenda upon Plato's work, and for consequently overestimating its descriptive content while underestimating its prescriptively normative features. A reexamination of Hegel's metaphilosophy nevertheless reveals that he appreciated the broader significance of Plato's political philosophy within a conceptual framework that transcends the traditional dichotomy of description and prescription and that explores issues concerning the relation of theory and practice.

The question whether corporations should be used as a means for administering distributive justice is crucial. There are two fundamental issues associated with this. Firstly, would the introduction of rules have any distributional effect? Secondly, what would be the efficiency cost? In this paper, we explore both questions with reference to a job-security corporate rule. We show that the job-security rule will always produce distributional consequences which are consistent with its objectives. However, whether or not it is a socially desirable (...) policy depends on whether the economy is at an efficient allocation and what motivated the policy. It can be shown that under some conditions, even if the initial allocation is efficient, yet not the socially desirable one, a corporate rule—like the job security one—may produce socially desirable gains. The same can be said in the case where the initial allocation is inefficient even in the presence of competitive markets (dueto incompleteness problems). However, these social gains would come at the expense of competitiveness. In an internationally open environment this may offset the initial social gains from this policy. Whether or not this happens would then depend on whether agents have a social dimension to their preferences or not. If they do, their response to the initiative may offset the initial loss of competitiveness. Alternatively, society may face the dilemma whether to remain open to uphold local conceptions of distributive justice. (shrink)

It is commonly thought that a central lesson of Republic i is to indicate the flaws of the τέχνη model for thinking about justice and ruling. I provide a novel defense of Socrates’ arguments from τέχνη. I argue that (i) book 1 is less hostile to the τέχνη model than is often supposed and that (ii) Socrates’ arguments from τέχνη are more favorable than they are often supposed.

[EN] In this article we argue for a world in which open borders are the rule and not the exception. This argument is based on the general recognition of ius migrandi as a basic right of persons. An open-border immigration policy is preferable—at least from a normative standpoint—to the typical policies designed to control or block borders through the simplistic mode of constructing walls. On the basis of a global conception of distributive justice as suggested by cosmopolitan egalitarians, (...) we claim that open-door policies—or, failing in that, the implementation of a system of economic compensation for poor countries—provide powerful means to respond to the enormous inequalities that exist between countries and represent an appropriate way to order current migratory flows. [ES] En este artículo se arguye a favor de un mundo en donde las fronteras abiertas sean la regla y no la excepción. Para ello, se presentan dos tipos de argumentos. El primero se basa en el reconocimiento general del ius migrandi como un derecho fundamental de las personas. Además de un modo idóneo de ordenar los actuales flujos migratorios, una política migratoria de fronteras abiertas es preferible, al menos desde un punto de vista normativo, a las habituales políticas diseñadas para controlar o bloquear las fronteras mediante la construcción de muros. El segundo se asienta sobre una concepción global de la justicia distributiva desarrollada por los igualitaristas cosmopolitas, se sostiene que una política de puertas abiertas –o, en su defecto, un modelo de compensación económica– constituiría un modo de responder a las enormes desigualdades existentes entre los países. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:74. RULE-UTILITARIANISM AND HUME'S THEORY OF JUSTICE One of the striking features of Hume's theory of justice is the narrowness of the range of judgments it is designed to illumine. For Hume the paradigms of judgments of justice are judgments about particular actions, not judgments about laws or institutions or states of affairs. Moreover, the characterization of actions as just or unjust is possible according to Hume only in (...) a certain kind of legal context - namely when questions arise about the conformity of conduct to a certain class of legal rules, those which comprise the law of property. In such contexts, actions are said to be just if they are in accordance with property rules and unjust if they are contrary to them. Of particular interest is the exclusion of judgments about the law - and in particular judgments about property rules - from the class of judgments of justice. Hume recognizes, of course, that we often have occasion to evaluate rules of law, including the rules which make up the law of property. When such judgments have to be made, however, it is never their justice or injustice which is in question for Hume. The fact that he often refers to the rules of property as "rules of justice" may seem to be inconsistent with this view, but it is not. When Hume refers to property rules in this way, it is not because he wishes to signify that the rules themselves satisfy some principle of justice, but rather because he conceives of them as embodying our criteria for the making of judgments about the justice of particular acts. Property rules cannot be viewed as "rules of justice" in this sense without satisfying some supralegal standard of acceptability. But the standard in quesrtion is social utility, not justice. Property rules qualify as "rules of justice", then, not because they are just but rather because they serve the public interest. Like some contemporary rule-utilitarians, Hume expressly disallows the question whether particular acts of 75. justice are socially useful. Or rather, to be more accurate, he claims that the disutility of particular acts sanctioned by property law counts neither against their being regarded as "acts of justice" nor against recognition of the obligation to perform them. Neither the characterisation of particular actions as "just" nor the stringency of the obligation to perform them is affected by the discovery that they might have to be said not to be in the public interest if attention were to be concentrated on the special circumstances of their performance. The reason is that it is a mistake, Hume thinks, for such acts to be viewed in isolation from other similar acts. Rather they must be seen as forming part of a scheme or system - a scheme or system which, taken in its entirety, serves the public interest. Hume's theory of justice thus embodies an unusually neat distinction between questions of justice and questions of social utility. When questions of justice are allowed to arise which is when the justice of particular acts is to be determined - questions of social utility do not arise. And when questions of social utility are allowed to arise - as they do when property rules have to be evaluated - questions of justice do not arise. Despite the sharp distinction he draws between justice and utility, Hume's theory of justice is clearly a utilitarian one. It is indeed a veritable prototype of the kind of theory now dubbed "rule-utilitarian". As such it has obvious attractions for would-be utilitarians, if it can be made to work. It would enable utilitarians to offer an account of judgments of justice in terms of rules enjoying the status of secondary principles of morality. Justice judgments could be represented as a special sub-class of moral judgments and the principles regulating them as subordinate to, and derivable from, the principle of utility. The vexed question of the relation between justice and utility would thereby be resolved without challenge to the assumption that they are different values and also without 76. abandonment of the claim that the principle of utility is the only underivative moral principle. By contrast, utilitarians for whom the... (shrink)

WE SCHOLARS WHO WRITE ABOUT THE Republic have found much to say about the education of Plato’s warriors. We carefully and thoughtfully relate their virtues to those of the Republic ’s philosopher-kings, and even to those of Plato’s Socrates. We have found much less to say about Plato’s peculiar account of that for which they are educated— war. I agree with Leon Craig that war and spiritedness are central to the argument of the Republic. Indeed, I will contend, Socrates’ three (...) different accounts of war reflect and, in a way, complete the central argument of the Republic. Yet Craig and other modern scholars of the cultivation of Plato’s warriors have very little to say on Socrates’ three accounts of the city at war. (shrink)

A transnational capitalist class has emerged as that segment of the world bourgeoisie that represents transnational capital, the owners of the leading worldwide means of production as embodied in the transnational corporations and private financial institutions. The spread of TNCs, the sharp increase in foreign direct investment, the proliferation of mergers and acquisitions across national borders, the rise of a global financial system, and the increased interlocking of positions within the global corporate structure, are some empirical indicators of the (...) transnational integration of capitalists. The TCC manages global rather than national circuits of accumulation. This gives it an objective class existence and identity spatially and politically in the global system above any local territories and polities. The TCC became politicized from the 1970s into the 1990s and has pursued a class project of capitalist globalization institutionalized in an emergent transnational state apparatus and in a "Third Way" political program. The emergent global capitalist historic bloc is divided over strategic issues of class rule and how to achieve regulatory order in the global economy. Contradictions within the ruling bloc open up new opportunities for emancipatory projects from global labor. (shrink)

The increasing availability of digital data reflecting economic and human development, and in particular the availability of data emitted as a by-product of people’s use of technological devices and services, has both political and practical implications for the way people are seen and treated by the state and by the private sector. Yet the data revolution is so far primarily a technical one: the power of data to sort, categorise and intervene has not yet been explicitly connected to a social (...) justice agenda by the agencies and authorities involved. Meanwhile, although data-driven discrimination is advancing at a similar pace to data processing technologies, awareness and mechanisms for combating it are not. This paper posits that just as an idea of justice is needed in order to establish the rule of law, an idea of data justice – fairness in the way people are made visible, represented and treated as a result of their production of digital data – is necessary to determine ethical paths through a datafying world. Bringing together the emerging scholarly perspectives on this topic, I propose three pillars as the basis of a notion of international data justice: visibility, engagement with technology and antidiscrimination. These pillars integrate positive with negative rights and freedoms, and by doing so challenge both the basis of current data protection regulations and the growing assumption that being visible through the data we emit is part of the contemporary social contract. (shrink)

From Galileo and Newton to Thomas Hobbes and Martin Luther King, Jr., thinkers throughout history have consciously employed scientific techniques to better understand the non-physical world. The Age of Reason and the Enlightenment led theorists to apply scientific reasoning to the non-scientific disciplines of politics, economics, and moral philosophy. Instead of relying on the woodcuts of dissected bodies in old medical texts, physicians opened bodies themselves to see what was there; instead of divining truth through the authority of an ancient (...) holy book or philosophical treatise, people began to explore the book of nature for themselves through travel and exploration; instead of the supernatural belief in the divine right of kings, people employed a natural belief in the right of democracy. In this provocative and compelling book, Shermer will explain how abstract reasoning, rationality, empiricism, skepticism--scientific ways of thinking--have profoundly changed the way we perceive morality and, indeed, move us ever closer to a more just world. (shrink)

The 1830s and 1840s are the formative years of modern public health in Britain, when the poor law bureaucrat Edwin Chadwick conceived his vision of public health through public works and began the campaign for the construction of the kinds of water and sewerage works that ultimately became the standard components of urban infrastructure throughout the developed world. This book first explores that vision and campaign against the backdrop of the great "condition-of-England" questions of the period, of what rights and (...) expectations working people could justifiably have in regard to political participation, food, shelter and conditions of work. It examines the ways Chadwick's sanitarianism fit the political needs of the much-hated Poor Law Commission and of Whig and Tory governments, each seeking some antidote to revolutionary Charitism. It then reviews the Chadwickians' efforts to solve the host of problems they met in trying to implement the sanitary idea: of what responsibilities central and local units of government, and private contractors, were to have; of how townspeople could be persuaded to embark on untried public technologies; of where the new public health experts were to come from; and of how elegant technical designs were to be fitted to the unique social, political and geographic circumstances of individual towns. Rejecting the view that Chadwick's program was a simple response to an obvious urban problem Professor Hamlin argues that at the time a "public health" focusing narrowly on sanitary public works represented a retreat of public medicine from involvement with the great social issues of the Industrial Revolution. In exploring the views of medical men who were critical of Chadwick, Hamlin suggests the parameters of a public health that might have been, in which concern for health and well-being becomes the foundation of a public medicine that is a principal guarantor of social justice. This book offers modern public heatlh professionals elements of a forgotten professional heritage that might be useful in responding to the bewildering range of health problems we now confront. (shrink)

Many open networks, distributed computing systems, and infrastructure management systems face a common problem: how to distribute a collectivised set of resources amongst a set of autonomous agents of heterogenous provenance. One approach is for the agents themselves to self-organise the allocation of resources with respect to a set of agreed conventional rules; but given an allocation scheme which maps resources to those agents and a set of rules for determining that allocation scheme, some natural questions arise—Is this allocation (...) fair? Is the allocation method effective? Is it efficient? Are the decision makers accountable? In this paper, we argue that some answers to these questions can be found in the formal characterisation of different aspects of ‘justice’ and that these different aspects need a principled operationalisation as policies for system management. We present a formal model and some experimental results, concluding that the different aspects are all inter-connected and that what is required is a comprehensive research programme in computational justice. (shrink)

Presented with the (non) choice of either assimilating into bourgeois society and, thus, annihilating themselves, or being annihilated by society, the working class subject may choose, neither, engaging, instead, in an act of negative freedom. By engaging in an act of negative freedom, the working class subject destroys all possibility of rehabilitation, thus, determining their fate. The act alone provides a means by which to mark the outer limits of what they are willing to tolerate. Through the act, (...) the subject is altered, their world is changed. Furthermore, before engaging in the act, they do not know what will happen to them. They are, in other words, stepping into the abyss of unknowing. In this article, I will explore the concept of negative freedom in relation to the working class subject: how engaging in such an act marks their fate, separating them from bourgeois society while, also, setting them free. At the same time, due to its inherent withdrawal from civil society, negative freedom veers dangerously near nihilism, thus, reducing their act to one without meaning. (shrink)