Liberalism

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan Ryan
Keyword(s):  
John Rawls ◽  
John Dewey ◽  
John Locke ◽  
Adam Smith ◽  
John Stuart Mill ◽  
Thomas Jefferson ◽  
Liberal Theory ◽  
Religious Authority ◽  
Isaiah Berlin ◽  
The Individual

This chapter explains what liberalism is. It is easy to list famous liberals, but it is harder to say what they have in common. John Locke, Adam Smith, Montesquieu, Thomas Jefferson, John Stuart Mill, Lord Acton, T. H. Green, John Dewey, and contemporaries such as Isaiah Berlin and John Rawls are certainly liberals. However, they do not agree on issues such as the boundaries of toleration, the legitimacy of the welfare state, and the virtues of democracy. They do not even agree on the nature of the liberty they think liberals ought to seek. The chapter considers classical versus modern liberalism, the divide within liberal theory between liberalism and libertarianism, and liberal opposition to absolutism, religious authority, and capitalism. It also discusses liberalism as a theory for the individual, society, and the state.

scholarly journals What would the political philosophers do? An exploration of ideological perspectives on ‘athlete-centered’ reform

2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 141
Author(s):  
Kadence Otto
Keyword(s):  
John Rawls ◽  
John Locke ◽  
College Athletics ◽  
Adam Smith ◽  
Dialectical Materialism ◽  
John Stuart Mill ◽  
The Political ◽  
Main Thrust ◽  
Inquiry Approach ◽  
Historical Relationship

In this paper I explore how the values inherent in the political philosophies of libertarianism, capitalism, utilitarianism, and egalitarianism are manifest in big-time college athletics reform which places athletes’ rights as its highest value. The initial intent of the paper focuses on the use of Marx and Engels’ dialectical materialism as a way of framing the historical relationship between the NCAA and the athletes. Next, I turn to the main thrust of the paper which is to utilize the ideological inquiry approach to explore the overarching values inherent in the perspectives of John Locke, Adam Smith, John Stuart Mill, and John Rawls in an attempt to see more clearly how their perspectives are manifest in ‘athlete-centered’ reform. Lastly, I put forth that, based on the values inherent in the perspectives of the political philosophers, ‘athlete-centered’ reform begins with liberty for the athlete, which is assured by right, just, and democratic institutions, and is secured by an athlete association.

Liberals II

Just Property ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 34-57
Author(s):  
Christopher Pierson
Keyword(s):  
John Rawls ◽  
John Dewey ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Social Institution ◽  
John Stuart Mill ◽  
Liberal Tradition ◽  
The Us

This chapter continues the evaluation of ideas about property within the modern liberal tradition. Much of this thinking has its origins in the later work of John Stuart Mill. I begin with some key ‘new’ liberals: T. H. Green, J. T. Hobhouse, and J. A. Hobson. These thinkers take a varyingly radical view of the provisionality of individual claims to private property. Following a short interlude on interwar liberalism, I turn to the development of liberal ideas on property in the US. My two key thinkers here are John Dewey and John Rawls. Both of these iconic liberal thinkers take a view of property which emphasizes its function as a social institution, one which has to be justified by its societal outcomes rather than its private and personal origins.

The Philosophic Origins of Deliberative Ideals

2018 ◽  
pp. 54-69
Author(s):  
Simone Chambers
Keyword(s):  
Immanuel Kant ◽  
Deliberative Democracy ◽  
John Rawls ◽  
John Dewey ◽  
Democratic Theory ◽  
John Stuart Mill ◽  
American Pragmatism ◽  
The Core ◽  
Intellectual Heritage ◽  
The Way

Deliberative democracy is a relatively recent development in democratic theory. But the theorists and practitioners of deliberative democracy often reach far back for philosophical and theoretic resources to develop the core ideas. This chapter traces some of those sources and ideas. As deliberative democracy is itself a somewhat contested theory, the chapter does not present a linear story of intellectual heritage. Instead it draws on a variety of sometimes disparate sources to identify different ideals that become stressed in different versions of deliberation and deliberative democracy. The philosophic sources canvased include Aristotle, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Immanuel Kant, John Stuart Mill, John Dewey and American Pragmatism, John Rawls, and Jürgen Habermas. The chapter pays special attention to the way different philosophical sources speak to the balance between the epistemic and normative claims of deliberative democracy.

“Inflation” of Human Rights. John Paul II and human rights

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 32-44
Author(s):  
Adrian J. Reimers
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
John Locke ◽  
John Stuart Mill ◽  
Human Being ◽  
Pope John Paul Ii ◽  
John Paul Ii ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Good And Evil ◽  
In Virtue Of ◽  
Individual Human

One of the central principles of modern political philosophy, dating from the time of John Locke, is that of human rights. Locke characterized a right as something pertaining to the individual human being as free and equal to every other human being. To this notion of inherent rights, John Stuart Mill added that a right must be something in virtue of which a person can make a claim on another or on the state. Third, the modern notion of right presupposes the concept of dignity. In contemporary societies, we are witnessing an inflation of rights, which raises two questions: 1) are new rights truly being discovered, and 2) how can we discern the legitimacy of these rights? J. S. Mill’s utilitarianism holds the touchstone of good and evil to be individual happiness, and that over his own self the individual is sovereign. From this it follows that only the individual can know what is his own true good. Therefore, he ought to expect that society will support or at least not interfere with his own attainment of his good as he conceives it. Therefore “my” rights must encompass that “I” recognize to be my own needs. Others are responsible to grant to the sovereign individual those rights that he claims. From such a principle follows the rights to personal sexual satisfaction, suicide, and to marry another of one’s own sex without public disapproval. Paradoxically, this inflation of rights is supported also by the quasi-Marxist notion that different classes of persons are inevitably opposed to each other and that for their protection the prerogatives of different groups must be recognized as rights.To avoid and correct this inflation it is necessary to develop a richer anthropology to found the concept of human dignity and, consequently, rights. Following the example and thinking of Pope John Paul II, we propose a reexamination of Mill’s claim that a right necessarily entails some well-defined claim on another personor entity, and that a right is not so much a legal claim as a claim upon conscience.

John Locke and Natural Law

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Harris
Keyword(s):  
John Rawls ◽  
Natural Law ◽  
John Locke ◽  
Church And State ◽  
John Stuart Mill ◽  
The State ◽  
Standard View ◽  
Modern View ◽  
Roman Catholics

The standard modern view of Locke portrays him as a simulacrum of John Stuart Mill or John Rawls. This chapter decisively shifts the terms in which Locke is understood away from this standard view. It shows that with Locke religious worship is neither private nor optional, and is a matter of duty rather than right primarily — a duty prescribed by natural law. Natural law led Locke to jurisdiction, and, more precisely, to two corresponding jurisdictions, the eccesiastical and civil. The different ends implied in these two jurisdictions and the different ways in which they were established made church and state free from each other's direction. Worship is not tolerated by the state, for the state has no jurisdiction over it; rather, it is free. Conversely the state is required to coerce religious or irreligious groups, whether Roman Catholics or atheists, who undermine the possibility of independent civil and ecclesiastical jurisdictions.

Uniting Individualism and Statism

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick J. Deneen
Keyword(s):  
John Dewey ◽  
John Locke ◽  
Adam Smith ◽  
Richard Rorty ◽  
National Government ◽  
Francis Bacon ◽  
Local Institutions ◽  
Classical Liberalism ◽  
Individual Liberty ◽  
Social Equality

This chapter examines the ways in which the individualist philosophy of classical liberalism and the statist philosophy of progressive liberalism reinforce each other. It begins with a discussion of the conflict between the “conservatives,” who advance the project of individual liberty and equality of opportunity especially through defense of a free and unfettered market, and the liberals, who aim at securing greater economic and social equality through extensive reliance upon the regulatory and judicial powers of the national government. The chapter shows how statism and individualism grow together while local institutions and respect for natural limits diminish, noting that, despite their differences, this ambition animated thinkers such as John Locke, John Dewey, Francis Bacon, Francis Bellamy, Adam Smith, and Richard Rorty.

Preamble

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan Ryan
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Political Thought ◽  
John Locke ◽  
Thomas Hobbes ◽  
John Stuart Mill ◽  
Bertrand Russell ◽  
Alexis De Tocqueville ◽  
Isaiah Berlin

This book explores the history and nature of liberalism and includes the views of political thinkers such as Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, John Stuart Mill, Bertrand Russell, Isaiah Berlin, Alexis de Tocqueville, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and G.W.F. Hegel. Part 1 of the book deals with conceptual and practical issues and covers topics ranging from liberalism and freedom to culture, and death penalty. Part 2 deals with liberty and security and includes Hobbes's political philosophy as well as Locke's thoughts on freedom. Part 3 examines liberty and progress and includes topics such as Mill's political thought, utilitarianism and bureaucracy, democracy, and Berlin's political theory. Part 4 focuses on liberalism in America, and Part 5 is concerned with work, ownership, freedom, and self-realization.

Utilitarianism and International Ethics

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerard Elfstrom
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
John Rawls ◽  
David Hume ◽  
John Stuart Mill ◽  
Individual State ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Jeremy Bentham ◽  
Ethical Theories ◽  
International Ethics ◽  
The Individual

Utilitarianism is inextricably linked to international ethics. The roots of the principle of utility can be traced to the 18th and 19th centuries, when it was employed by thinkers such as David Hume. However, Jeremy Bentham first formulated utilitarianism in detail and carefully studied its implications. According to Bentham, happiness is a condition in which an individual enjoys more pleasure than pain. Because utilitarianism is focused on the welfare of the individual, state boundaries are of little consequence. Its reach is inherently global. There are different varieties of utilitarianism. What sets them apart from other ethical theories is their stipulation that whatever is of value should be maximized for all and whatever of disvalue should be minimized for all. For Bentham, pleasure is the ultimate value. Later, John Stuart Mill distinguished between higher and lower pleasures and argued that higher pleasures should be given greater weight. In the 20th century, authors such as R. M. Hare determined that maximal satisfaction of preferences is the value to be sought. The utilitarian emphasis on maximization of value and its choice of values have generated much criticism from those who espoused human rights theories, such as John Rawls and those influenced by his work. At present, the scholarly literature dealing with issues related to international ethics mostly comes from those who are committed to human rights theory or who are committed to equality of outcomes for human beings.

Gotta Serve Somebody? Religious Liberty, Freedom of Conscience, and Religion as Comprehensive Doctrine

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 168-178
Author(s):  
Francis J. Beckwith
Keyword(s):  
Religious Belief ◽  
John Rawls ◽  
John Locke ◽  
Thomas Jefferson ◽  
Religious Liberty ◽  
Ronald Dworkin ◽  
Freedom Of Conscience ◽  
Comprehensive Doctrine ◽  
James Madison

This article critically assesses an account of religious liberty often associated with several legal and political philosophers: Ronald Dworkin, John Rawls, and Christopher Eisgruber and Lawrence Sager. Calling it the Religion as Comprehensive Doctrine approach (RCD), the author contrasts it with an account often attributed to John Locke and the American Founders Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, the Two Sovereigns approach (TS). He argues that the latter provides an important corrective to RCD’s chief weakness: RCD eliminates (or greatly diminishes) from our vision those aspects of religious belief and practice that most conventional religious believers would consider essential to their faith.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document