UNIGE document Scientific Article
previous document  unige:25914  next document
add to browser collection

Magistrats et gens de bien

Published in Philosophiques. 2005, vol. 32, no. 2, p. 295-317
Abstract I shall offer here a “dilemmatic” argument for liberal antipaternalism. Either it is the case – as Kantians maintain – that impersonal, impartial and universal rules enjoy ethical priority ; or it is the case – as Communitarians like MacIntyre maintain – that universal rules do not enjoy any such priority. If Kantians are right, then – as suggested by the conventional wisdom of textbooks in political philosophy – State-neutrality towards conceptions of the good is justified. And if Communitarians are right, then – surprisingly – State-neutrality is justified too. Therefore State-neutrality is justified. The first premiss is tautological, and needs no special study. The second premiss, linking the priority of universal rules to State-neutrality, is too well known to deserve our attention. But the third premiss, linking the non-priority of universal rules to State-neutrality, sounds like a paradox. The paper thus focuses on that third controversial premiss.
Keywords DroitParticularisme éthiqueLibéralismeAntipaternalismeNeutralité de l'Etat
Full text
(ISO format)
TAVAGLIONE, Nicolas. Magistrats et gens de bien. In: Philosophiques, 2005, vol. 32, n° 2, p. 295-317. https://archive-ouverte.unige.ch/unige:25914

399 hits



Deposited on : 2013-01-24

Export document
Format :
Citation style :