Hobbes on Sovereign AuthorityHow the Right of Nature Becomes Sovereign Right

Author(s):  
David Gauthier

The right to (private) property in Hobbes’s Leviathan is established by each man authorizing the sovereign, acting in the person of each, to renounce the natural right to unlimited possession in favor of an exclusive claim right (i.e., one that obligates others) to goods acquired and exchanged in accordance with procedures established by the sovereign. Yet this useful way to ground the right to private property and other rights runs afoul of punishment because Hobbes both asserts and denies that a person may authorize his own punishment. This chapter introduces a “Neo-Hobbesian” definition of punishment, which permits authorizing the sovereign to punish oneself if one expects to gain from the system of punishment.

2005 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-74
Author(s):  
Andrei Marmor

In this short essay I argue that the main insight of Murphy and Nagel’s book, The Myth of Ownership, that people have no right to their pre-tax income, is not supported by their claim that the right to private property is not a natural right. The non-naturalness of the right to private property, I argue, is irrelevant to their moral argument. The plausibility of their moral conclusion derives from the thesis (which they also seem to endorse) that people have a right to the fruits of their labor, maintaining, however, that there is no possible conception, morally speaking, of what the fruits of one's labor are, independent of a system of legal and social norms that constitute the terms of fair bargaining, pricing, etc. People can only have a right to a fair assessment of the added value of their labor, and the latter cannot make any sense independent of the entire system of norms prevailing in the relevant society. I argue that this last conclusion is not affected by the nature of the right to private property.


1982 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 28-41 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. B. Drury

In this paper I hope to show that the differences between the Lockian and Nozickian ideas regarding the foundation of private property are far greater than is generally assumed. My purpose is not to criticize Nozick, but to show that the accepted interpretation of Locke on which he relies is mistaken. In particular, I hope to show (1) that the theory of appropriation by labour is not applicable after the invention of money; and is meant to show that the right to property is based on the right to life and self-preservation, and (2) that property arrangements after the introduction of money are justified primarily by utility rather than natural right, and (3) that the conditions created by the invention of money make the ‘regulation’ of private property necessary for the preservation of mankind which is required by the law of nature.


2018 ◽  
Vol 35 ◽  
pp. 69-98
Author(s):  
Amy Lai

This paper argues that the right to expressing oneself through parodies should constitute part of the core freedom of expression of a normative copyright regime. By drawing upon natural law legal theories, the paper proposes a legal definition of parody that would help to bring the copyright jurisprudence of a jurisdiction more in line with its free speech tradition. It argues that a broad parody definition, one that encompasses a great variety of expressive works but would not compete with the original and its derivatives in the market, is preferable to a narrow one. The paper then explains why the parody defence in American law and the parody exception in the Canadian copyright statute should follow the proposed parody definition, which would properly balance the rights of copyright owners with those of users.


Problemata ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 60-78
Author(s):  
Damião Benilson Gomes de Melo ◽  
José Roberto de Araújo Freire

The object of this essay is to examine Amartia Sen’s approach to the justification of substantive rights pointed out in the third chapter of ‘Development as Freedom’ and his critique of the priority of formal freedoms in rawlsian theory. He points out a conflict between liberties (formal freedoms) and freedoms (material freedoms). This opposition will be confronted with Herbert Hart’s polemic in the third part of ‘Essays in Jurisprudence and philosophy’, where he points out a problem of Rawls’ formulation in not reconciling the admission of private property as a basic freedom with the principle of maximum equal freedom. The problem is whether the Sen model better addresses this issue. Our positive hypothesis. By establishing a small number of basic freedoms, Rawls treated the right as a mere formal guarantee. Consequently, the right to private ownership of large portions of land and the extensive control by private individuals over the financial system and over major industrial, commercial, and service goods, in the absence of any greater or consistent justification, end up envisioned by something equivalent to a self-justified natural right. As Marx said, it is not scientifically possible to conceal the original fact of the conquest of private property by covering it up under the diaphanous cloak of natural law, inasmuch as, to oppose the ‘natural right of a few’ it would be enough for the previously dispossessed majority to gather sufficient strength to impose a ‘natural right’ of the reconquest of usurpation. As for the method, it is an exclusively bibliographical research, which can be based, in a merely incidental way, on empirical data.


1993 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 367-389
Author(s):  
K.A.B. Mackinnon

[P]roperty must exist wherever men exist, and…the right to such property is the necessary consequence of the natural right of men to life and liberty.Thomas Reid 1788I proceed therefore to consider in what State or Order of Society there is the least temptation to ill conduct, and I confess that to me the Utopian System of Sir Thomas More seems to have the advantage of all others in this respect. In that System, it is well known there is no private Property. All that which we call Property is under the Administration of the State for the common benefit of the whole political Family.Thomas Reid 1794The few remarks on property that are found in the Essays on the Active Powers of the Human Mind of the eighteenth century Scottish “Common Sense” philosopher, Thomas Reid, have led at least one commentator to treat him as a fairly traditional advocate of the natural right to (private) property, albeit one with a concern for the very poor. In an article on William Paley and the rights of the poor, Thomas Home remarks in passing that Reid’s (and Adam Ferguson's)major concern was to justify natural rights to property and that their interest in the poor was so little that a reader who accidentally skipped a paragraph or a page would miss all they had to say on the topic.


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 85-90
Author(s):  
VLADIMIR TROYAN ◽  

The relevance of the interpretation of constitutional and legal guarantees of the right to vote is mediated by isolated scientific research in this area, as well as the lack of a universal approach to legal guarantees. In this regard, the purpose of the article is to argue and disclose the author’s definitive aspect of the claimed guarantees. In the work, the author named and characterized the normative (based exclusively on legal means) with the perspective of a branch of legal and technical; regulatory and institutional (combines the formal aspect with the activities of authorized entities) and associated legal (including a set of legal and other aspects) approaches to the definition of legal guarantees. Based on the second approach, as well as combining the guarantees of the right to vote directly guarantees of the subjective right itself and guarantees of its implementation, the author offers a definition of constitutional and legal guarantees of the right to vote.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Isra Revenia

This article is made to know the destinantion and the administrasi functions of the school in order to assist the leader of an organazation in making decisions and doing the right thing, recording of such statements in addition to the information needs also pertains to the function of accountabilitty and control functions. Administrative administration is the activity of recording for everything that happens in the organization to be used as information for leaders. While the definition of administration is all processing activities that start from collecting (receiving), recording, processing, duplicating, minimizing and storing all the information of correspondence needed by the organization. Administration is as an activity to determine everything that happens in the organization, to be used as material for information by the leadership, which includes all activities ranging from manufacturing, managing, structuring to all the preparation of information needed by the organization.


2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 14-21
Author(s):  
Deni Iriyadi

This research is a qualitative study aimed to determine the students' understanding of the concept of matter limit. The subjects were students of class XI IPA 1 SMA Negeri 1 Watampone. The concept includes the definition of the limit. Data obtained using a research instrument in the form of self-assessment and then proceed with the interview subjects were selected based on the results of self-assessment has been done before. Analysis using qualitative analysis of students' understanding of the concept of the limit concept. The results of this study indicate that students' understanding of concepts some of which are not / do not understand especially regarding definitions limit. In addition students are also wrong about the resolution limit. Students who understand the concept of limit dinyakatakan them restate concepts, including examples and classify the sample to non-completion of function and limit the right results.


Author(s):  
Olga Mykhailоvna Ivanitskaya

The article is devoted to issues of ensuring transparency and ac- countability of authorities in the conditions of participatory democracy (democ- racy of participation). It is argued that the public should be guaranteed not only the right for access to information but also the prerequisites for expanding its par- ticipation in state governance. These prerequisites include: the adoption of clearly measurable macroeconomic and social goals and the provision of control of the processes of their compliance with the government by citizens of the country; ex- tension of the circle of subjects of legislative initiative due to realization of such rights by citizens and their groups; legislative definition of the forms of citizens’ participation in making publicly significant decisions, design of relevant orders and procedures, in particular participation in local referendum; outlining methods and procedures for taking into account social thought when making socially im- portant decisions. The need to disclose information about resources that are used by authorities to realize the goals is proved as well as key performance indicators that can be monitored by every citizen; the efforts made by governments of coun- tries to achieve these goals. It was noted that transparency in the conditions of representative democracy in its worst forms in a society where ignorance of the thought of society and its individual members is ignored does not in fact fulfill its main task — to establish an effective dialogue between the authorities and so- ciety. There is a distortion of the essence of transparency: instead of being heard, society is being asked to be informed — and passively accept the facts presented as due. In fact, transparency and accountability in this case are not instruments for the achievement of democracy in public administration, but by the form of a tacit agreement between the subjects of power and people, where the latter passes the participation of an “informed observer”.


2009 ◽  
Vol 160 (8) ◽  
pp. 228-231
Author(s):  
Hansruedi Walther

A forest owner can only commercialize non-wood products and services within a tightly restricted market niche. On account of free access being permitted to the forest it is impossible to deny to third parties the consumption of many non-wood products and services: everybody has the right to be in the forest for recreation. As a result many non-wood services cannot be commercialized by the forest owner, or not exclusively. What would seem unthinkable elsewhere on private property seems to be taken for granted in the forest: third parties may take products from the forest and even sell them without being the forest owners. For certain nonwood services or products, such as the installation of rope parks or for burial in the forest, the organizer must conclude an agreement with the forest owner or draw up a contract for servitude or benefit. In addition, for these activities a permit from the Forestry Department is necessary. On the other hand, for an itinerant school class or for the production of forest honey neither a binding regulation with the forest owner nor a permit from the Forestry service is necessary, provided that no constructions are erected in the forest. The only exclusive right which remains to the forest owner, besides the sale of his property, is the exploitation of his trees within the legal framework.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document