Political Philosophy
Category

By In Ethics Discussions at PEA Soup, Normative Ethics, Political Philosophy Comments (16)

Ethics Discussion at PEA Soup: Jonathan Leader Maynard and Alex Worsnip’s “Is There a Distinctively Political Normativity?” with a critical précis by Alice Baderin

Welcome to what we expect will be a very interesting and productive discussion of Jonathan Leader Maynard and Alex Worsnip‘s “Is There a Distinctively Political Normativity?” The paper is published in the most recent edition of Ethics and is available through open access here. Alice Baderin has kindly agreed to contribute a critical précis, and it appears immediately below. Please join in the discussion!

(more…)

Read more

By In Political Philosophy Comments (2)

CFP: Workshop for Oxford Studies in Political Philosophy

The 7th annual Workshop for Oxford Studies in Political Philosophy will take place in Syracuse, NY, August 21-3, 2019.

Keynote speakers will be:

Kwame Anthony Appiah, NYU

Sally Haslanger, MIT

Joseph Raz, Columbia

We invite submissions of full papers (not abstracts) of between 7500 and 12000 words, including footnotes, to fill the remaining slots for the conference. (more…)

Read more

By In NDPR Discussion Forum, Political Philosophy Comments (8)

NDPR Forum on Andrew J. Cohen’s Toleration and Freedom from Harm

Welcome to our NDPR Forum on Andrew Jason Cohen’s Toleration and Freedom from Harm: Liberalism Reconceived (Routledge 2018), which was recently reviewed by Peter de Marneffe in NDPR. Please feel free to join in on the discussion, about the book, the review, or related issues. Andrew will be joining in soon.

(more…)

Read more

By In Oxford Studies Discussions, Political Philosophy Comments (15)

“The Moral Neglect of Negligence” by Seana Valentine Shiffrin, with a critical précis by Ekow Yankah

[MOVING TO FRONT, AS SEANA SHIFFRIN IS POSTING REPLIES TO HER COMMENTATORS]

We are excited to host a discussion of Seana Valentine Shiffrin‘s article “The Moral Neglect of Neglicence,” Ch. 8 of Oxford Studies in Political Philosophy Vol.3. Shiffrin’s article is available here, with kind permission from OUP. We expect the article to be available here permanently.

The discussion thread will be open May 2-4 for an initial round of questions and comments, after which Shiffrin will post a set of responses, probably by May 6 or 7. The discussion thread will then immediately open for another couple of days, after which Shiffrin will send a final round of responses.

We are thrilled to kick off the discussion with a critical précis by Ekow Yankah, below. Join us!

(more…)

Read more

By In Applied Ethics, Ethics Discussions at PEA Soup, Normative Ethics, Political Philosophy Comments (26)

Ethics Discussion at PEA Soup: Michael Cholbi and Alex Madva’s, “Black Lives Matter and the Call for Death Penalty Abolition,” with a critical précis by Erin Kelly

Welcome to what we expect will be a very interesting and productive discussion of Michael Cholbi and Alex Madva‘s, “Black Lives Matter and the Call for Death Penalty Abolition.” The paper is published in the most recent edition of Ethics and is available through open access here. Erin Kelly has kindly agreed to contribute a critical précis, and it appears immediately below. Please join in the discussion!

Erin Kelly writes:

Michael Cholbi and Alex Madva’s paper, “Black Lives Matter and the Call for Death Penalty Abolition,” argues that capital punishment wrongs black defendants and black communities, and that the proper remedy for this wrong is abolition of the death penalty. In developing this argument, they make an interesting case for understanding the racial wrongs of capital punishment in political terms—as instances of distributive injustice—rather than (simply) in terms of a failure to achieve retributive justice. I will explore both the nature of their claims about distributive justice and their criticism of retributive justice. I won’t address the case for abolition, which flows naturally from their conclusions about the harm done by the death penalty. Instead I will suggest, briefly, how their argument against the retributive theory could be stronger.

(more…)

Read more

By In Discussions, JESP Discussions, Political Philosophy Comments (11)

JESP Discussion of Benjamin Mitchell-Yellin’s “A View of Racism”

Welcome to the return of the Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy discussion! We’re looking at Benjamin Mitchell Yellin‘s new article, “A View of Racism: 2016 and America’s Original Sin”. Tommy Curry kicks things off with a critical précis, which appears immediately below. Please join the discussion!

Critical Précis by Tommy Curry

I. Introduction

The world before us has changed, not in any substantial way regarding the reality of racism, but merely in how its appearance has offended the sensibilities of what white Americans are willing to now perceive. The essay by Dr. Benjamin Mitchell-Yellin is an admirable product of the attention white philosophers are now paying to this break in racial etiquette under the Trump administration. Mitchell-Yellin has written a very powerful intervention into two dominant views of racism amongst philosophers that do in fact require attention and, as he points out, serious intervention.

(more…)

Read more

By In Ideas, Political Philosophy Comments (3)

Voter Fraud and Voter Suppression

Blackstone wrote that “it is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer”.  Fortescue wrote “one would much rather that twenty guilty persons should escape the punishment of death, than that one innocent person should be condemned and suffer capitally.”  Maimonides wrote “it is better and more satisfactory to acquit a thousand guilty persons than to put a single innocent one to death.” I don’t know what the correct number is (10, 20, 1000), but I do think that some such maxim is correct.

(more…)

Read more