The Possibility of a Fair Play Account of Legitimacy
dc.contributor.author | Tosi, Justin | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2017-05-11T22:14:32Z | |
dc.date.available | 2017-05-11T22:14:32Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2017-03 | |
dc.identifier.citation | The Possibility of a Fair Play Account of Legitimacy 2017, 30 (1):88 Ratio | en |
dc.identifier.issn | 00340006 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1111/rati.12114 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10150/623484 | |
dc.description.abstract | The philosophical literature on state legitimacy has recently seen a significant conceptual revision. Several philosophers have argued that the state's right to rule is better characterized not as a claim right to obedience, but as a power right. There have been few attempts to show that traditional justifications for the claim right might also be used to justify a power right, and there have been no such attempts involving the principle of fair play, which is widely regarded as the most promising basis for a claim right to obedience. William Edmundson argues that the principle of fair play cannot generate power rights, and so any attempt at a fair play account of legitimacy must fail. I explain how fair play could generate a power right, owing to its stipulation that the rules of a cooperative scheme specify the form of participants' repayment. | |
dc.language.iso | en | en |
dc.publisher | Wiley | en |
dc.relation.url | http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/rati.12114 | en |
dc.rights | © 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. | en |
dc.rights.uri | http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/ | |
dc.title | The Possibility of a Fair Play Account of Legitimacy | en |
dc.type | Article | en |
dc.contributor.department | University of Arizona Philosophy Department | en |
dc.identifier.journal | Ratio | en |
dc.description.note | 24 month embargo; Version of record online: 21 July 2015 | en |
dc.description.collectioninformation | This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu. | en |
dc.eprint.version | Final accepted manuscript | en |
dc.contributor.institution | University of Arizona, Philosophy Department; P. O. Box 210027 Tucson AZ 85721-0027 United States | |
refterms.dateFOA | 2017-07-22T00:00:00Z | |
html.description.abstract | The philosophical literature on state legitimacy has recently seen a significant conceptual revision. Several philosophers have argued that the state's right to rule is better characterized not as a claim right to obedience, but as a power right. There have been few attempts to show that traditional justifications for the claim right might also be used to justify a power right, and there have been no such attempts involving the principle of fair play, which is widely regarded as the most promising basis for a claim right to obedience. William Edmundson argues that the principle of fair play cannot generate power rights, and so any attempt at a fair play account of legitimacy must fail. I explain how fair play could generate a power right, owing to its stipulation that the rules of a cooperative scheme specify the form of participants' repayment. |