Introduction to Social & Political Philosophy

Transcription

1 Introduction 1 Introduction to Social & Political Philosophy what is Social and Political Philosophy? perhaps it is best to begin wi e distinction between political philosophy and political science political science is a firmly empirical study of e structure and workings of political institutions: e state and its familiar parts: legislative, executive, judiciary, civil service, etc political science has almost as long a history as political philosophy ere is not much of it in Plato but much of Aristotle s Politics is political science it was based on a study of over a hundred Greek city-states e central topic of social and political philosophy is Justice Plato s central concern in e Republic is justice dikaiosyne (pronounced: de-cow-eye sue-knee) is Greek word has a broader meaning an our word justice encompassing any kind of right treatment of oers (see dikaiosyne handout) so what is justice? when we ink of justice we first tend to ink of criminal cases and of punishment as in criminal justice system is sense of justice is what philosophers refer to a retributive justice but retributive justice and e problem of punishment are a small part of a much larger concern ere is e broader concern wi e organization of society and e distribution of e weal and goods of a society is sense of justice is what philosophers refer to as distributive justice social and political philosophy focuses on is broader conception of justice examines issues concerning e relationship between e individual and society and e political question concerning e best form of government given e relative scarcity of weal and goods how are ey to be distributed? is it just at e weal of society should be held in e hands of a very few e champagne glass economy of global capitalism Freeman Notes 1

2 Introduction 2 or should everyone receive e same? should e person who works hard at an unpleasant job receive no more an e person who refuses to work and watches TV all day? should e person who uses weal to e benefit of oers receive no more an e person who spends all eir money on gambling and debauchery? if a class of people has been treated unjustly and deprived historically on e basis of e color of eir skin be given more an an equal share or is is an injustice too? but more an e distribution of weal and goods is at issue distribution of privileges are equally important who will vote? will everyone s vote count e same? should e opinions of an illiterate who does not even have a clue about e issue have e same say as someone who has studied e issues for many years? should everyone be allowed to drive? should everyone receive exactly e same treatment before e law or should some people receive special treatment? enjoyment of society s gifts is also an issue should everyone receive e same education? ere are also questions of status should ere be social classes? ese are all concerns of justice and our answer to ese questions depends upon our conception of justice Aristotle begins his Politics wi e claim at man is a political animal what he meant by is is not at everyone is a politician but at man is a social animal we cannot avoid living in a world wi oers no man is an island we live in a world wi oers not just ose friends and family and oers whom we encounter in our everyday lives but wi untold numbers of oers we will never encounter what we do affects countless oers and ose oers, of course, affect us in what ey do ere is a sense in which we are clearly dependent upon one anoer even e most antisocial hermit lives in is world of interdependence for example, we depend on oers not to attack us wiout reason as ey similarly depend upon us to live in society is to be bound by certain obligations duties to oers whom we will never know Freeman Notes 2

3 Introduction 3 and ey too have duties to us we also claim certain rights for ourselves e right not to be attacked as we walk down e street e right to speak freely about e critical issues of e day e right to believe in whatever religion we want or not to believe as a social animal man is us inescapably political wheer consciously or unconsciously his very life involves a political stand social and political philosophy is us also concerned wi a number of abstract claims about rights, duties, privileges, and demands for justice, equality, and freedom social and political philosophy is concerned broadly wi e relationship between society vs e individual at least ideally, politics is continuous wi morality our political duties and obligations are often e same as our moral obligations our claims to certain moral rights are often claims to political rights as well particularly ose very general and absolute rights e product of e Enlightenment and modern philosophy which we call human rights e virtues of government are ideally e virtues of individuals government should be just, temperate, courageous, honest, humane, considerate, and reasonable e key to a successful society is cooperation if people do not cooperate e success of society requires some auority to bring individual interest in line wi public interest is auority is generally called e state in general we might say at e function of e state is to protect justice but what is justice? Our concept of e state and e extent of its power and auority depends upon our conception of human nature on e question of to what extent human beings are capable of living in cooperation at one end of e political scale ere is little confidence in human beings being able to live peacefully wiout force and us, in order to live in peace and stability, are willing to surrender individual rights and live in a strong auoritarian state at e opposite end of e scale ere are anarchists ose wi great confidence in individuals and deep distrust of government auority vs anarchy Freeman Notes 3

4 Introduction 4 between e extremes ere are a range of moderate positions Democrats and Republicans bo believe in a government at is at least partially run by e people emselves but has sufficient power to enforce laws over individual interests same central problem: finding a balance between e need for cooperation on e one hand and individual rights and interests on e oer in oer words, e problem of justice one could also differentiate political views according to a scale between totalitarianism vs freedom but is should not be confused wi e familiar opposition between Left vs Right Communism Socialism Progressive Liberal Democrat vs Conservative Republican Neo-Con Fascism notice at e extremes at bo ends of is scale are totalitarian systems it has been said at e central task of social and political philosophy is: to provide a justification for coercive institutions ese institutions range in size from e family, to e nation-state, to world organizations such as e United Nations ey are essentially institutions which sometimes employ force or e reat of force to control e behavior of eir members in order to achieve eier minimal or wide-ranging goals need to show at e auorities wiin ese institutions have a right to be obeyed and at ere members have a duty to obey em need to demonstrate legitimate auority Socrates and Plato interested in justifying e city-state after 17 century most social and political philosophers focused on justifying e nation-state more frequently in 19 and 20 centuries: attempt to justify more wide-ranging institutions including various forms of world government he notes at it is not enough to simply claim such an auority nor is it enough if at claim is accepted by many or even a majority of citizens Freeman Notes 4

5 Introduction 5 us ere is a need for rational justification of course ere can be brutal regimes wi no concern for justification but to e extent at e power of e government depends on a sufficient number of eir members freely acknowledge eir claims to be legitimate auorities en ere is a need for rational justification us e central task of social and political philosophy: to show how ese claims to legitimate auority can be justified us it is a problem of justice some philosophers argue at none of ese claims to legitimate auority are justified and us recommend some form of anarchism Sterba argues at Wolff is wrong in his assumptions and at most defenders of legitimate auority do not take e position Wolff gives to em he is arguing against straw men in oer words Sterba s book endeavors to show at e different political eories differ in terms of e ideal by which legitimate auority is justified welfare liberals like John Rawls contend at e ultimate moral reason for acknowledging someone as a legitimate auority is justified in terms of fairness libertarians like John Hospers and Robert Nozick contend it is justified in terms of liberty feminists, like Susan Okin, contend it is justified in terms of androgyny or a gender-free society socialist like C.B.MacPhearson, Kai Nielson, and Carol Gould contend e ultimate justification is in terms of equality communitarians like Alasdair MacIntyre and Michael Sandel contend it is provided by e common good Freeman Notes 5