TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1. THE VARIETY OF ANARCHISMS. DEFINING CRITICAL PHILOSOPHICAL ANARCHISM WITHIN THE CURRENT DEBATE ON ANARCHISM 2. THE MAIN PARTS AND UNDERLYING IDEAS OF MY ARGUMENT CHAPTER ONE: WHAT THE PROBLEM IS 1.1. THE PROBLEM OF POLITICAL OBLIGATION 1.1.i. The Correlativity Thesi 1.1.ii. The Two Main Aspects of the Problem of Political Obligation 1.1.iii. Quality-Based and Interaction-Based Evaluations of Political Institutions 1.1.iv. The Conditions of Political Obligation 1.2. THE PARADOX OF AUTHORITY 1.3. DISSOLVING THE PARADOX: ROUSSEAU AS A PARADIGM OF STATE JUSTIFICATION 1.4. RAZ’S THEORY AS AN ILLUSTRATION 1.5. THE ARGUMENT FOR CRITICAL PHILOSOPHICAL ANARCHISM 1.5.1. An Alternative to Prominent Positions on the State 1.5.2. Improving the Way Critical Philosophical Anarchists See Their Position. Simmons’ Theory as an Illustration 1.5.2.i. Simmons’ Theory 1.5.2.ii. Specific Arguments against Simmons 1.5.2.iii. A More General Departure from Simmons’ Approach 1.6. CONCLUSION CHAPTER TWO.: THE LIMITS OF VOLUNTARISM 2.1. AN ANARCHIST CRITICISM OF VOLUNTARIST THEORIES OF POLITICAL OBLIGATION 2.1.1. Actual Consent 2.1.2. Tacit Consent 2.1.3. Hypothetical Consent 2.1.4. Raz on Consent 2.1.5. Social Contract Theories 2.1.6. A Defense of Hypothetical Contractualism 2.2. DISMISSING THE CONCEPTUAL ARGUMENT FOR POLITICAL OBLIGATION 2.3. THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE ANARCHIST CRITICISM OF CONSENT CHAPTER THREE: AN ANARCHIST CRITIQUE OF THE RAWLSIAN IDEA OF A NATURAL DUTY OF JUSTICE 3.1. RAWLS’ THEORY AND THE NATURAL DUTY OF JUSTICE 3.2. AN ANARCHIST CRITICISM OF THE NATURAL DUTY OF JUSTICE 3.2.1. Against the Justice of Political Institutions as a Ground of Political Obligation 3.2.2. The Argument Arising from Particularity 3.2.3. Rawls and Particularity 3.2.4. Self-Governance, Equality, and the Role of General Moral Principles 3.3. THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE ANARCHIST CRITICISM OF NATURAL DUTY CHAPTER FOUR: THE FAILURE OF THE PRINCIPLE OF FAIRNESS AS AN ACCOUNT OF POLITICAL OBLIGATION 4.1. THE PRINCIPLE OF FAIRNESS 4.2. "TRIVIALITY," "SUCCESS," AND "JUSTICE" 4.3. THE ANARCHIST CRITICISM OF THE PRINCIPLE OF FAIRNESS 4.3.1. "Receipt" versus "Acceptance" 4.3.1.i. Objections to Understanding Fairness Obligations in Terms of "Receipt" 4.3.1.ii. Klosko’s Defense of "Receipt" 4.3.1.iii. Simmons on "Acceptance" 4.3.1.iv. The Significance of "Acceptance” 4.3.2. Fairness, Political Obligation, and the Idea of Societies as "Schemes of Social Cooperation" 4.4. THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE ANARCHIST CRITICISM OF THE PRINCIPLE OF FAIRNESS CHAPTER FIVE: HORTON REVISITED 5.1.HORTON’S PRELIMINARY ARGUMENTS FOR ASSOCIATIVE POLITICAL OBLIGATIONS 5.1.1. About a Non-Voluntarist Contract Theory 5.1.2. On the Communitarian Approach 5.1.3. Against Associative Political Obligations 5.2. HORTON’S CONSTRUCTIVE ACCOUNT OF ASSOCIATIVE POLITICAL OBLIGATIONS AND THE ANARCHIST CHALLENGE 5.2.1. The Significance of Membership Argument 5.2.2. The Hobbesian, or Value, Argument 5.2.3. The Associative Argument 5.2.4. The Anarchist Challenge 5.3. THE CHALLENGE FROM MORAL UNIVERSALISM 5.4. CONCLUDING REMARKS: THE VALUE OF HORTON’S ASSOCIATIVE THEORY CHAPTER SIX: WHERE FRIENDS OF POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS AND ANARCHISTS ARE IN THE SAME BOAT 6.1. NEGATIVE AND POSITIVE POINTS RESULTING FROM THE ANARCHIST CRITICISMS 6.1.1. The Negative Conclusions 6.1.2. The Positive Conclusions 6.1.3. The Implications of the Anarchist Challenge for Political Thought and Practice 6.2. THE CONTRIBUTION OF CRITICAL PHILOSOPHICAL ANARCHISM 6.2.1. The Anarchist Perspective 6.2.2. The Significance of the Question of Obligation 6.2.3. Justification as an Endless Process 6.2.4. The Anarchist Ideal of Legitimacy 6.3. CONCLUSION CHAPTER SEVEN: ANARCHISM: PHILOSOPHICAL AND POLITICAL 7.1. THE TASKS OF POLITICAL ANARCHISTS 7.2. A CRITICAL PHILOSOPHICAL ANARCHIST CRITIQUE OF BOOKCHIN’S ANARCHIST POLITICAL PROGRAM 7.2.1. Bookchin Revisited 7.2.2. A Poststructuralist Intervention 7.2.3. The Gordonian "Anarchy Alive!" 7.3. ANARCHIST APPROACHES TO CONCRETE DILEMMAS CONCLUSION OVERVIEW OF THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY CONCLUSION BIBLIOGRAPHY
This Contemporary Anarchist Studies volume focuses on anarchism's contribution to the debate on political authority, specifically how philosophical anarchism challenges the idea of political obligation.
Magda Egoumenides is Visiting Lecturer at the University of Cyprus. She has published articles in the Review Journal of Political Philosophy, Isopolitia, and the book Critical Philosophical Anarchism.
In this thoughtful and passionately argued book Magda Egoumenides
advances a distinctive approach to the problem of justifying
political institutions that she calls ‘critical philosophical
anarchism’. After critically assessing a variety of justifications
of state authority, Egoumenides distinguishes her own view from
other forms of philosophical anarchism by locating it firmly within
a more comprehensive anarchist theory. The result is a book that
raises serious questions about the existing literature on political
obligation, while also offering a controversial and challenging
alternative; and in the process Egoumenides does much to revive the
vitality of anarchist thinking.
*John Horton, Emeritus Professor of Political Philosophy at Keele
University, UK*
Magda Egoumenides has done us the great service of keeping critical
philosophical anarchism on the agenda of political philosophy.
While not quite arguing for a anarchist position herself,
Egoumenides demonstrates the importance of taking both the critical
perspective and the positive insights of anarchism seriously. She
reminds us that the existence of the state and the scope of its
activities always face substantial moral challenge, and the battle
for state legitimacy has to be fought and won on very difficult
terrain. And she convincingly shows that anarchist theorists can
also face challenges in living up to their own standards. This is a
fresh and incisive contribution to the debate.
*Jonathan Wolff, Professor of Philosophy, University College
London, UK*
Philosophical Anarchism and Political Obligation speaks very
cautiously and constructively to three constituencies: political
philosophers who are troubled by the fundamental problem of
political obligation; philosophical anarchists who are troubled by
the grounds for and implications of their position; and political
anarchists who are troubled by the fact that most people do not
share their revolutionary point of view. As a member of all three
constituencies, I find the book especially valuable.
*Paul McLaughlin, Senior Lecturer, University of Tartu,
Estonia*
Magda Egoumenides’ Philosophical Anarchism and Political Obligation
is a rigorous and knowledgeable account of the analytic
philosophical reading of anarchism. Egoumenides perceptively
extends the scope of philosophical anarchism’s critique of
‘political obligation’ to contemporary anarchist and liberal
theorists and arguments. It is a highly relevant text for all those
engaged in this tradition.
*Benjamin Franks, Lecturer, University of Glasgow, Scotland*
 |
Ask a Question About this Product More... |
|
