This course focuses on two kinds of debate: normative debates about how we should act as citizens and respond to certain social forces in contemporary society; and conceptual debates about the meaning of some prominent terms in political rhetoric and discourse. It is split into four main themes: au...
Lecture 1 - Political Obligation and Consent
Issues in Political Theory - Political Authority and Obligation
(Chapter 1)
Authority definition:
The person subject to the authority has a certain ‘pro’ attitude towards the person or
institution that claims authority.
Following sections discuss arguments in support of the claim that we have a duty to obey
the law. What normative and descriptive premises do they rely? How plausible are they?
Consent:
Main Argument/Heading Notes
Consent theory (contract
- Plato’s Crito recounts Socrates story - 1) Consent theorists claim that by
theory - should obey the law
consenting to obey the law, each of us can impose on ourselves an
because we have consented to
obligation to obey the law. Uncontroversial - 2) They also claim that we
do so. It is a type of
have consented to obey the law. More controversial.
voluntarism.
- Express consent: announce in speech or in writing that we consent to
Difference between express
something. - Tacit consent refers to more subtle forms of consenting within
and tacit consent
which no express announcement is made.
Argument for tacit consent - the fact most of us have never given express consent to obey the law
means that we have never given express consent but it also does not show
Introduction to Political Ideas 1
, Main Argument/Heading Notes
we have tacitly consented to obey the law. They argue we have tacitly
consented by doing things such as vote in elections and even by just
residing inside a territory.
Difference between
- express consent means consent by doing something whereas tacit consent
qualifications for express and
means consent by not doing something.
tacit consent
- If useful acts counted as express consent (e.g. breathing) then we would
Reason for acts that count as end up consenting to things not because we want to but because we could
express consent being not not avoid consenting. By only having non useful acts as serve as acts of
useful express consent then you no longer have to avoid doing useful acts in order
to avoid consenting.
- 2 acts consent theorists want to say are acts of consent to obey the law -
Problem for consent theorists
voting and residing - are both useful acts. However, acts of tacit consent
+ solution
can be useful acts.
- act can only qualify if it would normally be prohibited to the person who
consents, as someone has a right that they not perform the act without
Qualification for acts of tacit
thereby consenting. Right holder grants an exemption to the prohibition
consent
only on the condition that, when the act is performed, consent is
automatically given.
Main argument/Heading Notes
- Plato and Locke claim that this counts as consent to obey the laws of that
Residence as Consent
territory.
- Rousseau: when we are forced to stay in a country by a coercive state, our
Arguments against
residence does not count as effective consent.
- The thought that the state can only treat our residence as tacit consent to
obey the law if it has a moral right that we not reside in the country without
thereby consenting. Doesn’t seem right that the state would be able to do
Introduction to Political Ideas 2
, Main argument/Heading Notes
this as many people own the land on which they live so have a right to do
so.
Main argument/Heading Notes
- The state sets up and runs election for the benefit of people who
Voting as tacit consent participate in them. Plausible that the state does have a right that people not
vote if they do not wish to consent to obey the law.
- Requirement consent must be free and uncoerced to be effective - whether
- Voting can’t count as an act
or not we choose to vote, we will all still be forced to obey the law anyway.
of tacit consent until until
Some who would prefer to optout altogether, if they could, will choose to
those who do not vote are
vote nevertheless. They may as well be forced to obey the laws of the party
permitted to disobey the law.
that they dislike the least.
Main argument/Heading Notes
Hypothetical consent and Hypothetical consent - consent that we would give in an imagined situation
normative consent that does not match reality.
- Claim that by looking at hypothetical consent you can determine what
Response to the challenge of would be rational for us to agree to, even if we were purely self-seeking -
why it matters Why should we care about what would be rational for us if we actually
want to act irrationally?
- Consent to something immoral is ineffective. Perhaps immoral refusal to
Normative Consent (Estlund consent to something is also as ineffective as it fails to prevent the person
2007) in question from being bound to do the thing that they immorally refuse to
consent to.
- Estlund suggests that perhaps those who do not consent to obey the law
can be compelled to do so, because it is wrong of them to withhold their
consent to do so.
Fairness:
Basic Argument: those who have willingly sacrificed their liberty, in order to make possible
the benefits provided by the state, have a right to expect that the rest of us, who also receive
these benefits, do the same.
Introduction to Political Ideas 3
, This only works if is members can reasonably regard it as a cooperative enterprise that
works to their mutual benefit (Political obligation, 2007, Stanford Encyclopaedia of
Philosophy)
Objection provided by Nozick - suppose that any group could place you under an
enforceable obligation to take part in its project, by foisting benefits on you regardless of
how much you want them. Nozick argues this would unfairly curtail your freedom to choose
in which projects to involve yourself so as to best promote those ends you deem worth
promoting.
Some say that Nozick’s example does not matter because the benefits are of little value so
there is no fair-play obligation.
Klosko (1992, 2005) argues that people can be bound to such a duty by non-voluntary
receipt of something which is ‘presumptively beneficial’ or ‘indispensable for satisfactory
lives’, such as physical security + protection from a hostile environment.
Simmons - difference between receiving and accepting benefits, receiving them is not
enough to place someone under an obligation. Even though modern political societies
produce non-excludable goods (national defence) these benefits are commonly regarded as
purchased (through taxes), rather than as accepted from the cooperative efforts of our fellow
citizens.
Critics say that Simmons drew too sharp a distinction between the acceptance and receipt of
benefits. There are many who partake in the benefits of a cooperative act passively without
being fully aware of the need to their own part.
Others deny that obligations must be incurred voluntarily.
Community
Main Argument/Heading Notes
- Political obligation is something we are bound by simply being
members of these communities. Not important whether or not we
Argument for
choose to be members of these communities. Obligation bound up with
very notion of membership; is not simply and add-on
Introduction to Political Ideas 4
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller samuel_smith. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for £10.48. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
