A libertarian theory of free immigration

Keyword(s):  
Author(s):  
Christopher Evan Franklin

According to incompatibilists, free will and moral accountability exist only in nondeterministic worlds. But which ones? Where exactly must indeterminism be located, and what role must it play to make room for the possibility of freedom and accountability? This chapter evaluates three possible libertarian answers—non-action-centered accounts, nonbasic action-centered accounts, and basic action-centered accounts—and argues that libertarians should embrace a basic action-centered account that locates indeterminism at the moment of basic action (e.g., choice). Central to this chapter is showing that the source of the major problems with Kane’s event-causal libertarian theory can be traced to his problematic conception of the role and location of indeterminism and that we can avoid these problems by embracing the alternative conception developed in minimal event-causal libertarianism.


2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
David Gordon

AbstractWhen libertarian political philosophy attracted wide public notice in the 1970s, a common view was that the distinctive individual rights advocated in libertarian theory required grounding in a theory of ethics. Recently, this view has come under challenge. It has been argued that resort to such grounding in ethical theory is unneeded. An appeal to common sense intuitions suffices to justify libertarianism. First, a brief account of libertarianism will be presented. Then, some examples of the older, pro-grounding position will be discussed. Then, the principal defense of the newer view, Michael Huemer’s The Problem of Political Authority, will be examined. This discussion constitutes the substance of the present paper. The principal contention of the present article will be that the argument to libertarianism from intuitions does not succeed. In conclusion, it will be suggested that a return to the earlier, grounding view is indicated for philosophers who wish to defend libertarianism.


2017 ◽  
pp. 297-329
Author(s):  
David M. Hart ◽  
Gary Chartier ◽  
Ross Miller Kenyon ◽  
Roderick T. Long
Keyword(s):  

Philosophia ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
pp. 357-367 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Lemos
Keyword(s):  

MEST Journal ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 15-27
Author(s):  
Cole Green ◽  
Alejandro Hernandez

While the libertarian theory of property rights has been thoroughly studied, there has been minimal research done in regard to a deceased person’s ability to dictate the future of the property he owned in life. In this paper, we attempt to develop a theory of the property rights of deceased people consistent with libertarian principles. We analyze the legitimacy of contracts between two individuals after one individual dies, ownership of the cadaver, the deceased’s right to decide which actions are permissible to perform on the said cadaver, and the status of the deceased property when a will both has and has not been written. While there has been no explicit commentary made regarding these topics, outside from the will, the authors extrapolated current libertarian theories on property rights and applied them accordingly. While the authors of the paper ultimately do not reach a consensus agreement on some of the issues discussed in the paper, this exploratory work on the property rights of the deceased is intended to open further discussion and research on the matter to further contribute to the formulation of a concise libertarian legal theory.


2018 ◽  
pp. 39-72 ◽  
Author(s):  
FRED S. SIEBERT
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document