Vše

Co hledáte?

Vše
Projekty
Výsledky výzkumu
Subjekty

Rychlé hledání

  • Projekty podpořené TA ČR
  • Významné projekty
  • Projekty s nejvyšší státní podporou
  • Aktuálně běžící projekty

Chytré vyhledávání

  • Takto najdu konkrétní +slovo
  • Takto z výsledků -slovo zcela vynechám
  • “Takto můžu najít celou frázi”

Why is Willing Irrelevant to the Grounding of (Any) Obligation? Remarks on Arthur Ripstein’s Conception of Omni-Lateral Willing

Identifikátory výsledku

  • Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

    <a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F68378122%3A_____%2F17%3A00477210" target="_blank" >RIV/68378122:_____/17:00477210 - isvavai.cz</a>

  • Výsledek na webu

  • DOI - Digital Object Identifier

Alternativní jazyky

  • Jazyk výsledku

    angličtina

  • Název v původním jazyce

    Why is Willing Irrelevant to the Grounding of (Any) Obligation? Remarks on Arthur Ripstein’s Conception of Omni-Lateral Willing

  • Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

    Arthur Ripstein’s recent reconstruction of Kant’s legal philosophy seeks to place it beyond the crude dichotomy of positivism vs non-positivism in suggesting that legal obligation be accounted for in terms of omni-lateral willing, or the form of willing that pertains to coercive public institutions that are invested with moral authority. Thus, while residing in social institutions, omni-lateral willing realizes a genuinely moral demand, that is, the demand to secure equal freedom for autonomous agents in their mutual interaction. The paper probes the ability of omni-lateral authorization to overcome the dichotomy between positivism and non-positivism. I wish to suggest that omni-lateral willing disguises what legal and moral obligation have in common and conveys the impression that we, as agents, can be obligated in two distinct ways that are disconnected from one another. I will locate the reason for the misrepresentation in what appears to be a standard interpretation of the role of agent motivation in legal and moral obligation. Ripstein’s account appears to be presupposing the same picture, even as he tries to move beyond it. In the end I will be arguing that Ripstein is right in his diagnosis that individual willing falls short of grounding legal obligation. His mistake is to think that some other form of willing can deliver the grounding question, because none can.

  • Název v anglickém jazyce

    Why is Willing Irrelevant to the Grounding of (Any) Obligation? Remarks on Arthur Ripstein’s Conception of Omni-Lateral Willing

  • Popis výsledku anglicky

    Arthur Ripstein’s recent reconstruction of Kant’s legal philosophy seeks to place it beyond the crude dichotomy of positivism vs non-positivism in suggesting that legal obligation be accounted for in terms of omni-lateral willing, or the form of willing that pertains to coercive public institutions that are invested with moral authority. Thus, while residing in social institutions, omni-lateral willing realizes a genuinely moral demand, that is, the demand to secure equal freedom for autonomous agents in their mutual interaction. The paper probes the ability of omni-lateral authorization to overcome the dichotomy between positivism and non-positivism. I wish to suggest that omni-lateral willing disguises what legal and moral obligation have in common and conveys the impression that we, as agents, can be obligated in two distinct ways that are disconnected from one another. I will locate the reason for the misrepresentation in what appears to be a standard interpretation of the role of agent motivation in legal and moral obligation. Ripstein’s account appears to be presupposing the same picture, even as he tries to move beyond it. In the end I will be arguing that Ripstein is right in his diagnosis that individual willing falls short of grounding legal obligation. His mistake is to think that some other form of willing can deliver the grounding question, because none can.

Klasifikace

  • Druh

    C - Kapitola v odborné knize

  • CEP obor

  • OECD FORD obor

    50501 - Law

Návaznosti výsledku

  • Projekt

    <a href="/cs/project/GA15-23955S" target="_blank" >GA15-23955S: ROLE PRINCIPU PROPORCIONALITY V ROZHODOVÁNÍ ÚSTAVNÍCH SOUDŮ</a><br>

  • Návaznosti

    P - Projekt vyzkumu a vyvoje financovany z verejnych zdroju (s odkazem do CEP)

Ostatní

  • Rok uplatnění

    2017

  • Kód důvěrnosti údajů

    S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Údaje specifické pro druh výsledku

  • Název knihy nebo sborníku

    Freedom and Force: Essays on Kant’s Legal Philosophy

  • ISBN

    978-1-84946-316-4

  • Počet stran výsledku

    15

  • Strana od-do

    113-127

  • Počet stran knihy

    240

  • Název nakladatele

    Hart Publishing

  • Místo vydání

    Oxford

  • Kód UT WoS kapitoly