New York University Press
NOMOS - American Society for Political and Legal Philosophy
Reveals the possibilities and challenges of civic education in circumstances of extreme polarization, and how civic learning and political divisiveness can interact and influence each other
As fears about polarization—and its contribution to democratic crisis and corrosion—rise, many people have posited civic education as a possible remedy. In a time of increasing political polarization, what should the goals of civic education be, and how should they be implemented? In the latest installment of the NOMOS series, Eric Beerbohm and Elizabeth Beaumont bring together a distinguished group of interdisciplinary scholars across philosophy, politics, and law, inviting us to think deeply about the complex promises and pitfalls of civic education.
Contributors raise a variety of crucial considerations not only about how to educate citizens in a polarized era but also for a polarized era. What types of civic learning hold promise for preparing students to navigate their way through a political landscape of escalating hostile factions, distrust, truth decay, and disagreement about basic facts? Could or should civic education attempt to reduce or counteract polarization, or should it focus on other aims?
Beaumont and Beerbohm show us that the dynamics and circumstances of polarization do not stop at the schoolhouse gates, but bring new urgency together with added pressures and constraints to all civic education. As political polarization continues to intensify across the globe, this riveting volume illuminates the significance, the possibilities, and the challenges of civic education in the contemporary era.
Features contributions that respond to deep challenges to social cohesion from racial injustice
In the latest installment of the NOMOS series, a distinguished group of interdisciplinary scholars explore the erosion—and potential rebuilding—of civic bonds in response to injustice, wrongdoing, and betrayal. Contributors address the possibility of reconciliation and repair, drawing on cutting-edge insights from the fields of political science, philosophy, and law. Nine timely essays explore our pivotal moment in history, from the question of reparations for slavery to the from the art—and impact—of the public apology.
The editors of this volume encourage us to not only examine the roots of mistrust, but also to imagine a collective way forward, particularly as we face the continuing threat of the COVID-19 pandemic. Reconciliation and Repair provides thought-provoking perspectives in an age where they are desperately needed.
Explores the challenges of governing in a post-truth world
The relationship between truth and politics has rarely seemed more troubled, with misinformation on the rise, and the value of expertise in democratic decision-making increasingly being dismissed. In Truth and Evidence, the latest installment in the NOMOS series, Melissa Schwartzberg and Philip Kitcher bring together a distinguished group of interdisciplinary scholars in political science, law, and philosophy to explore the most pressing questions about the role of truth, evidence, and knowledge in government.
In nine timely essays, contributors examine what constitutes political knowledge, who counts as an expert, how we should weigh evidence, and what can be done to address deep disinformation. Together, they address urgent questions such as what facts we require to confront challenges like COVID-19; what it means to #BelieveWomen; and how white supremacy shapes the law of evidence. Essential reading for our fraught political moment, Truth and Evidence considers the importance of truth in the face of widespread efforts to turn it into yet another tool of political power.
Explores the challenges facing democracies in the twenty-first century
In Democratic Failure, Melissa Schwartzberg and Daniel Viehoff bring together a distinguished group of interdisciplinary scholars in political science, law, and philosophy to explore the key questions and challenges facing democracies, both in the past and present, around the world.
In ten timely essays, contributors examine the fascinating, centuries-old question of whether or not democracy can ever fulfill the promise of its ideals. Together, they explore lessons from the history of democracy, various failures of democratic representation, and more.
Ultimately, this latest installment of the NOMOS series provides thought-provoking insights into how we conceptualize, measure, and address democratic erosion in our present-day world.
Criminal
tribunals, truth commissions, reparations, apologies and memorializations are
the characteristic instruments in the transitional justice toolkit that can help
societies transition from authoritarianism to democracy, from civil war to
peace, and from state-sponsored extra-legal violence to a rights-respecting
rule of law. Over the last several decades, their growing use has established
transitional justice as a body of both theory and practice whose guiding norms
and structures encompasses the range of institutional mechanisms by which
societies address the wrongs committed by past regimes in order to lay the
foundation for more legitimate political and legal order.
In Transitional
Justice, a group of leading
scholars in philosophy, law, and political science settles some of the key
theoretical debates over the meaning of transitional justice while opening up
new ones. By engaging both theorists and empirical social scientists in debates
over central categories of analysis in the study of transitional justice, it
also illuminates the challenges of making strong empirical claims about the
impact of transitional institutions.
Contributors:
Gary J. Bass, David Cohen, David Dyzenhaus, Pablo de Greiff, Leigh-Ashley
Lipscomb, Monika Nalepa, Eric A. Posner, Debra Satz, Gopal
Sreenivasan, Adrian
Vermeule, and Jeremy Webber.
As the principles and practices of democracy continue to spread ever more widely, it is hard to imagine a corner of the globe into which they will not eventually penetrate. But the euphoria of democratic revolutions is typically short-lived, and usually followed by disgruntlement and even cynicism about the actual operation of democratic institutions. It is widely accepted that democracy is a good thing. However democrats have much work to do in improving the performance of democratic institutions.
The essays in this volume focus on this difficult and vital challenge: how can we improve the design of democratic institutions? How can public deliberation in democracies be enhanced? How can elections be reformed so as to dampen the excessive influence of special interests, especially those with money? How can democratic institutions be reformed so they can deal with issues that transcend the boundaries of the nation-state? And finally, how can democratic practices better take account of the internal plurality of societies that are ethnically or otherwise divided?
Contributors: Brooke Ackerly, Ian Ayres, Geoffrey Brennan, John Ferejohn, Alan Hamlin, Russell Hardin, Donald Horowitz, Stephen Macedo, Philip Petit, Philippe C. Schmitter, Ian Shapiro, Philippe Van Parjis, Iris Marion Young.
The rule of law has been celebrated as “an unqualified human good," yet there is considerable disagreement about what the ideal of the rule of law requires. When people clamor for the preservation or extension of the rule of law, are they advocating a substantive conception of the rule of law respecting private property and promoting liberty, a formal conception emphasizing an “inner morality of law,” or a procedural conception stressing the right to be heard by an impartial tribunal and to make arguments about what the law is? When are exertions of executive power “outside the law” justified on the ground that they may be necessary to maintain or restore the conditions for the rule of law in emergency circumstances, such as defending against terrorist attacks?
In Getting to the Rule of Law a group of contributors from a variety of disciplines address many of the theoretical legal, political, and moral issues raised by such questions and examine practical applications “on the ground” in the United States and around the world. This timely, interdisciplinary volume examines the ideal of the rule of law, questions when, if ever, executive power “outside the law” is justified to maintain or restore the rule of law, and explores the prospects for and perils of building the rule of law after military interventions.
Human Nature in Politics brings the competences and perspectives of law, philosophy and political science to bear on an imporant subject seldom treated at book length. The subject of human nature in politics is as old as systematic thought about politics. Out of favor for a period in modern times, it is now once more the subject of attention by political theorists who often borrow heavily from the disciplines of biology and psychology. The plurality of their approaches and insights is reflecteed in Part I of the book: Perspectives on Human Nature.
Although appeals to human nature have historically been made by both radicals and conservatives, it is the latter who have more typically sought support from this source. However, modern radicals are beginning to re-explore the subject, as is evidenced in the second section on "Human Nature and Radical Political Thought."
In the concluding section of the book, four authors analyze the question of "Rationality and Human Nature" and, with a broader interpretation of rationality, find bases in human nature for some confidence that politics need not be an irrational enterprise. The bibliography at the end of the volume is of particular value for all students of political theory. Thirteen outstanding authors contribute to this volume, which must be of interest to legal philosophers and students of jurisprudence in all English-speaking countries.
A distinguished group of scholars explore the moral values and political consequences of privatization
The 21st century has seen a proliferation of privatization across industries in the United States, from security and the military to public transportation and infrastructure. In shifting control from the state to private actors, do we weaken or strengthen structures of governance? Do state-owned enterprises promise to be more equal and fair than their privately-owned rivals? What role can accountability measures play in mediating the effects of privatization; and what role does coercion play in the state governance and control? In this latest installment from the NOMOS series, an interdisciplinary group of distinguished scholars in political science, law, and philosophy examine the moral and political consequences of transferring state-provided or state-owned goods and services to the private sector.
The essays consider how we should evaluate the decision to privatize, both with respect to the quality of outcomes that might be produced, and in terms of the effects of privatization on the core values underlying democratic decision-making. Privatization also affects the structure of governance in a variety of important ways, and these essays evaluate the consequences of privatization on the state. Privatization sheds new light on these highly salient questions of contemporary political life and institutional design.
A state-of-the-art meditation on relations, theoretical and practical, among a familiar triad of themes: comunitarianism, liberalism, and democracy.
--American Political Science Review
A collection of distinguished contributors, from a wide range of disciplines, examine the implications of the resurgence of interest in community. The chapters in Democratic Community consider the fundamental issues that divide liberals and communitarians, as well as the structure of communities, the roles of freedom and democratic institutions in sustaining one another, the place of a democratic civil society in a democratic polity, and the contributions of feminist thinking.
This thirty-fifth volume in the American Society of Political and Legal Philosophy series is devoted, as is each volume in the series, to a single topic-- in this case, the implications for human nature and democratic theory of the resurgence of interest in community. Democratic Community deals not only with fundamental issues that divide liberals and communitarians, but is also concerned with the structure of communities, the roles of freedom and democratic institutions in sustaining one another, the place of a democratic civil society in a democratic polity, and the contributions of feminist thinking to the great debate. The collection of distinguished contributors, from a wide range of disciplines, includes: Richard J. Arneson (University of California, San Diego), Jean Baechler (University of Paris, Sorbonne), Christopher J. Berry (University of Glasgow), Robert A. Dahl (Yale University), Martin P. Golding (Duke University), Carol C. Gould (Stevens Institute of Technology), Amy Gutmann (Princeton University), Jane Mansbridge (Northwestern University), Kenneth Minogue (London School of Economics), Robert C. Post (University of California, Berkeley), David A. J. Richards (New York University), Gerald N. Rosenberg (University of Chicago), Bruce K. Rutherford (Yale University), Alan Ryan (Princeton University), and Carmen Sirianni (Brandeis University).
This Major Reference series brings together a wide range of key international articles in law and legal theory. Many of these essays are not readily accessible, and their presentation in these volumes will provide a vital new resource for both research and teaching. Each volume is edited by leading international authorities who explain the significance and context of articles in an informative and complete introduction.
The many questions that surround movements for secession and self-determination are both practically urgent and theoretically perplexing. The United States settled its secession crisis in the 1860s. But the trauma and unfinished business of those events are still with us. Around the world secession and self-determination are the key issues that cause strife and instability.
This volume provides an unusually comprehensive consideration of the many challenges of law and political philosophy that accompany them, and offers theoretical insights that provide guidance for policy. Among the questions considered are: should the international community recognize a right to secede and, if so, what conditions must be satisfied before the right can be asserted? Should secession and its conditions be recognized within domestic constitutions? Secession is the most extreme form of political separation and there are modes of self-determination short of it, including indigenous peoples' self-government and minority language rights. To what degree can these intrastate autonomy arrangements help ameliorate the injustices faced by indigenous groups?
In this thirty-second annual volume in the American Society for Political and Legal Philosophy's NOMOS series, entitled Majorities and Minorities, thirteen distinguished contributors consider a diverse selection of topics. Included are essays on legitimacy of the majority, the utilitarian view of majoritarianism, majorities and elections, pluralism and equality, democratic theory, and American democracy and majority rules.
Of Interest to political scientists, philosophers, and legal scholars, this collection brings together a variety of viewpoints. Each author is a leading voice within his or her specialized field.
This, the twenty-seventh volume in the annual series of publications by the American Society for Political and Legal Philosophy, features a number of distinguised contributors addressing the topic of criminal justice. Part I considers "The Moral and Metaphysical Sources of the Criminal Law," with contributions by Michael S. Moore, Lawrence Rosen, and Martin Shapiro.
The four chapters in Part II all relate, more or less directly, to the issue of retribution, with papers by Hugo Adam Bedau, Michael Davis, Jeffrie G. Murphy, and R. B. Brandt. In the following part, Dennis F. Thompson, Christopher D. Stone, and Susan Wolf deal with the special problem of criminal responsibility in governmentone of great importance in modern society. The fourth and final part, echoing the topic of NOMOS XXIV, Ethics, Economics, and the Law, addresses the economic theory of crime. The section includes contributions by Alvin K. Klevorick, Richard A. Posner, Jules L. Coleman, and Stephen J. Schulhofer.
A valuable bibiography on criminal justice by Andrew C. Blanar concludes this volume of NOMOS.
From the sprawling remnants of the Soviet empire to the southern tip of Africa, attempts are underway to replace arbitrary political regimes with governments constrained by the rule of law. This ideal which subordinates the wills of individuals, social movements--and even, sometimes, democratically elected majorities--to the requirements of law, is here explored by leading legal and political thinkers.
Part I of The Rule of Law examines the interplay of democracy and the rule of law, while Part II focusses on the centuries-old debate about the meaning of the rule of law itself. Part III takes up the constraints that rationality exercises on the rule of law. If the rule of law is desirable partly because it is rational, then departures from that rule might also be desirable in the event that they can be shown to be rational. Part IV concentrates on the limits of the rule of law, considering the tensions between liberalism and the rule of law which exist despite the fact that reasoned commitment to the rule of the law is preeminently a liberal commitment.
Contributing to the volume are: Robert A. Burt (Yale University), Steven J. Burton (University of Iowa), William N. Eskridge, Jr. (Georgetown University), John Ferejohn (Stanford University), Richard Flathman (Johns Hopkins University), Gerald F. Gaus (University of Minnesota, Duluth), Jean Hampton (University of Arizona), Russell Hardin (University of Chicago), James Johnson (University of Rochester), Jack Knight (Washington University), Stephen Macedo (Harvard University), David Schmidtz (Yale University), Lawrence B. Solum (Loyola Marymount University), Michael Walzer (Princeton University), Catherine Valcke (University of Toronto), and Michael P. Zuckert (Carleton College).
A distinguished group of scholars explores compromise in contemporary affairs
Do lawmakers have a greater ethical responsibility to compromise than ordinary citizens? How does one rectify what is at stake when lawmakers concede to compromise for the sake of reaching resolution? Is compromise necessarily equalizing and is it a reasonable mode of problem solving and dispute resolution? In this latest installment from the NOMOS series, distinguished scholars across the fields of political science, law, and philosophy tackle the complex set of questions that relate to the practice of compromise and its implications for social and political life in modern societies.
The volume, edited by Jack Knight, brings together a range of perspectives – in both disciplinary and substantive terms – on representation, political morality, disagreement, negotiation, and various forms of compromise. The ten essays reflect a variety of considerations across interdisciplinary lines, and provide a new and thought-provoking discussion of the policy, practice, and philosophy of compromise, covering a number of specific topics including alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and conscientious objection.
Examining these issues and more, Compromise offers new and thought provoking insights into the pressing issue of the importance of compromise in social and political affairs.
In the United States, there exists increasing uneasiness about the predominance of self-interest in both public and private life, growing fear about the fragmentation and privatization of American society, mounting concerns about the effects of institutionsranging from families to schools to the mediaon the character of young people, and a renewed tendency to believe that without certain traditional virtues neither public leaders nor public policies are likely to succeed. In this thirty-fourth volume in The American Society of Legal and Political Philosophy, a distinguished group of international scholars from a range of disciplines examines what is meant by virtue, analyzing various historical and analytical meanings of virtue, notions of liberal virtue, civic virtue, and judicial virtue, and the nature of secular and theological virtue.
The contributors include: Jean Baechler (University of Paris-Sorbonne), Annette C. Baier (University of Pittsburgh), Ronald Beiner (University of Toronto), Christopher J. Berry (University of Glasgow), J. Budziszweski (University of Texas), Charles Larmore (Columbia University), David Luban (University of Maryland), Stephen Macedo (Harvard University), Michael J. Perry (Northwestern University), Terry Pinkard (Georgetown University), Jonathan Riley (Tulane University), George Sher (University of Vermont), Judith N. Shklar (Harvard University), Rogers M. Smith (Yale University), David A. Strauss (University of Chicago), and Joan C. Williams (American University).
The collapse of the Soviet empire stands as a dramatic reminder that political institutions are human creations that can be designed more or less well. The question of what constitutes a viable political order is as old as it is profound, and is a central part of the works of such thinkers as Plato, Aristotle, Machiavelli, Hobbes, Locke, Montesquieu, and the American Founders.
In eighteen original essays, Political Order presents the work of major scholars such as Robert Dahl, John Gray, Jennifer Nedelsky, Pasquale Pasquino, James Scott, Karen Orren, Steven Skowronek, Walter Dean Burnham, Morris Fiorina, and Norman Schofield who address some of the most pressing questions about political order. Under what conditions do we get political order rather than political chaos? How is political order sustained once it has been created? Do constitutions and electoral systems matter, and if so how much? Is there one best type of political order, and, if not, what is the range of viable possibilities and how should they be evaluated?
An in-depth political, legal, and philosophical study into the implications of wealth inequality in modern societies.
Wealth, and specifically its distribution, has been a topic of great debate in recent years. Calls for justice against corporations implicated in the 2008 financial crash; populist rallying against “the one percent”; distrust of the influence of wealthy donors on elections and policy—all of these issues have their roots in a larger discussion of how wealth operates in American economic and political life.
In Wealth a distinguished interdisciplinary group of scholars in political science, law and philosophy address the complex set of questions that relate to economic wealth and its implications for social and political life in modern societies. The volume thus brings together a range of perspectives on wealth, inequality, capitalism, oligarchy, and democracy. The essays also cover a number of more specific topics including limitarianism, US Constitutional history, the wealth defense industry, slavery, and tax policy.
Wealth offers analysis and prescription including original assessment of existing forms of economic wealth and creative policy responses for the negative implications of wealth inequality. Economic wealth and its distribution is a pressing issue and this latest installment in the NOMOS series offers new and thought provoking insights.
Throughout the history of moral, political, and legal philosophy,
many have portrayed passions and emotions as being
opposed to reason and good judgment. At the same time,
others have defended passions and emotions as tempering
reason and enriching judgment, and there is mounting
empirical evidence linking emotions to moral judgment. In
Passions and Emotions, a group of prominent scholars in
philosophy, political science, and law explore three clusters
of issues: “Passion & Impartiality: Passions & Emotions in
Moral Judgment”; “Passion & Motivation: Passions & Emotions
in Democratic Politics”; and “Passion & Dispassion:
Passions & Emotions in Legal Interpretation.” This timely,
interdisciplinary volume examines many of the theoretical
and practical legal, political, and moral issues raised by such
questions.
Immigration, Emigration and Migration consists of essays written by distinguished scholars across the fields of law, political science, and philosophy that examine questions of travel and migration across national borders.
Questions of immigration and border enforcement practices are particularly salient in contemporary public discourse, and examinations of policy and practice bring forth new philosophical quandaries. Why the common assumption that each country has the right to control its own borders? How are laws that restrict or regulate migration created and justified? Why has the criminalization of migration increased? How can migration be better considered through the point of view of the migrants themselves? What are the differences in international and national institutional migratory policy?
The volume explores questions of border control and enforcement, criminalization of borders, and how to address current debates and changes in regards to migration and immigration. The intersection of analysis and prescription provides both an assessment of current forms of thought or regulation and suggestion of alterations to address the flaws or failures of present approaches. The eight essays in this volume reflect a variety of considerations and explorations across interdisciplinary lines, and provide a new and thought-provoking discussion of policy, practice, and philosophy of migratory and border practices.
Few topics are more ubiquitous in everyday life and, at the same time, more controversial in practice, than that of one’s moral obligation to loyalty. Featuring essays by scholars working in a variety of subjects from law to psychology, Loyalty presents diverse perspectives on dilemmas posed by potential conflicts between loyalties to specific institutions or professional roles and more universalistic conceptions of moral duty. The volume begins with a philosophical exploration of theories of loyalty, both Eastern and Western, then moves to examine several problematic situations in which loyalty is often a factor: partisan politics, the armed forces, and lawyer-client relationships. A fair and balanced analysis from a wide range of disciplinary and normative viewpoints, Loyalty infuses new life into an oft-tread avenue of scholarly inquiry.
Contributors: Ryan K. Balot, Paul O. Carrese, Yasmin Dawood, Bernard Gert, Kathleen M. Higgins, Sanford Levinson, Daniel Markovits, Lynn Mather, Russell Muirhead, Nancy Sherman, Paul Woodruff
What are the proper aims of education in a liberal democracy? Given the deep disagreement about moral and religious values in modern societies, what is the proper balance between public and private claimants to educational authority? Should parents be given greater control over their children's formal education? Are today's public schools promoting a culture of rootless individualism? Do we increasingly resort to prisons and punishment instead of schooling and moral education to control young people? And what, finally, should be the fate of the great project of racially integrated schooling: a project that energized a vast expenditure of hopes and resources in the latter half of the 20th century in America? Should we recommit ourselves to the ideal of integration, or should we embrace other, perhaps better, ways to help the disadvantaged and promote social integration? Should we go further, and affirm that predominantly black educational institutions have intrinsic benefits, such as preserving black culture and providing role models for black youngsters?
As education reform takes center stage these questions are at the heart of what it means to be an American and participate in a democratic society. The essayists in this volume bring philosophical, political, and legal reflection to bear on the practical questions of how education should be changed to meet the needs of the twenty-first century. In so doing they display a determination to illuminate the educational choices that lie before all modern democracies.
Contributors: Anita L. Allen, Lawrence Blum, Harry Brighouse, Randall Curren, Peter de Marneffe, James G. Dwyer, Christopher Eisgruber, William A. Galston, Amy Gutmann, Michael W. McConnell, Rob Reich, Nancy L. Rosenblum, Yael Tamir, John Tomasi, and Andrew Valls.
Within Western political philosophy, the rights of groups has often been neglected or addressed in only the narrowest fashion. Focusing solely on whether rights are exercised by individuals or groups misses what lies at the heart of ethnocultural conflict, leaving the crucial question unanswered: can the familiar system of common citizenship rights within liberal democracies sufficiently accommodate the legitimate interests of ethnic citizens.
Specifically, how does membership in an ethnic group differ from other groups, such as professional, lifestyle, or advocacy groups? How important is ethnicity to personal identity and self-respect, and does accommodating these interests require more than standard citizenship rights? Crucially, what forms of ethnocultural accommodations are consistent with democratic equality, individual freedom, and political stability? Invoking numerous cases studies and addressing the issue of ethnicity from a range of perspectives, Ethnicity and Group Rights seeks to answer these questions.
Can individuals believe that they are acting with integrity, yet in disobedience to the dictates of their conscience? Can they retain fidelity to their conscience while ignoring a sense of what integrity requires? Integrity and conscience are often thought to be closely related, perhaps even different aspects of a single impulse. This timely book supports a different and more complicated view. Acting with integrity and obeying one's conscience might be mutually reinforcing in some settings, but in others they can live in varying degrees of mutual tension. Bringing together prominent scholars of legal theory and political philosophy, the volume addresses both classic ruminations on integrity and conscience by Plato, Hume, and Kant as well as more contemporary examinations of professional ethics and the complex relations among politics, law and personal morality.
A collection of essays that unpacks the history, nature, development, and beliefs of American Conservatism
The topic of American conservatism is especially timely—and perhaps volatile. Is there what might be termed an “exceptional” form of conservatism that is characteristically American, in contrast to conservatisms found in other countries? Are views that are identified in the United States as conservative necessarily congruent with what political theorists might classify under that label? Or does much American conservatism almost necessarily reflect the distinctly liberal background of American political thought?
In American Conservatism, a distinguished group of American political and legal scholars reflect on these crucial questions, unpacking the very nature and development of American conservative thought. They examine both the historical and contemporary realities of arguments offered by self-conscious conservatives in the United States, offering a well-rounded view of the state of this field. In addition to synoptic overviews of the various dimensions of American conservative thought, specific attention is paid to such topics as American constitutionalism, the role of religion and religious institutions, and the particular impact of the late Leo Strauss on American thought and thinkers. Just as American conservatism includes a wide, and sometimes conflicting, group of thinkers, the essays in this volume themselves reflect differing and sometimes controversial assessments of the theorists under discussion.
Moral universalism, or the idea that some system of ethics applies to all people regardless of race, color, nationality, religion, or culture, must have a plurality over which to range a plurality of diverse persons, nations, jurisdictions, or localities over which morality asserts a universal authority. The contributors to Moral Universalism and Pluralism, the latest volume in the NOMOS series, investigate the idea that, far from denying the existence of such pluralities, moral universalism presupposes it. At the same time, the search for universally valid principles of morality is deeply challenged by diversity. The fact of pluralism presses us to explore how universalist principles interact with ethical, political, and social particularisms. These important essays refuse the answer that particularisms should simply be made to conform to universal principles, as if morality were a mold into which the diverse matter of human society and culture could be pressed. Rather, the authors bring philosophical, legal and political perspectives to bear on the core questions: Which forms of pluralism are conceptually compatible with moral universalism, and which ones can be accommodated in a politically stable way? Can pluralism generate innovations in understandings of moral duty? How is convergence on the validity of legal and moral authority possible in circumstances of pluralism? As the contributors to the book demonstrate in a wide variety of ways, these normative, conceptual, and political questions deeply intertwine.
Contributors: Kenneth Baynes, William A. Galston, Barbara Herman, F. M. Kamm, Benedict Kingsbury, Frank I. Michelman, William E. Scheuerman, Gopal Sreenivasan, Daniel Weinstock, and Robin West.
Essays on the political, legal, and philosophical dimensions of political legitimacy
Scholars, journalists, and politicians today worry that the world’s democracies are facing a crisis of legitimacy. Although there are key challenges facing democracy—including concerns about electoral interference, adherence to the rule of law, and the freedom of the press—it is not clear that these difficulties threaten political legitimacy. Such ambiguity derives in part from the contested nature of the concept of legitimacy, and from disagreements over how to measure it.
This volume reflects the cutting edge of responses to these perennial questions, drawing, in the distinctive NOMOS fashion, from political science, philosophy, and law. Contributors address fundamental philosophical questions such as the nature of public reasons of authority, as well as urgent concerns about contemporary democracy, including whether “animus” matters for the legitimacy of President Trump’s travel ban, barring entry for nationals from six Muslim-majority nations, and the effect of fundamental transitions within the moral economy, such as the decline of labor unions. Featuring twelve essays from leading scholars, Political Legitimacy is an important and timely addition to the NOMOS series.
Can theories of evolution explain the development of our capacity
for moral judgment and the content of morality itself?
If bad behavior punished by the criminal law is attributable
to physical causes, rather than being intentional or voluntary
as traditionally assumed, what are the implications for rethinking
the criminal justice system? Is evolutionary theory
and “nature talk,” at least as practiced to date, inherently
conservative and resistant to progressive and feminist proposals
for social changes to counter subordination and secure
equality?
In Evolution and Morality, a group of contributors from philosophy,
law, political science, history, and genetics address
many of the philosophical, legal, and political issues raised
by such questions. This insightful interdisciplinary volume
examines the possibilities of a naturalistic ethics, the implications
of behavioral morality for reform of the criminal law,
the prospects for a biopolitical science, and the relationship
between nature, culture, and social engineering.
In this thirty-first annual volume in the American Society of Legal and Political Philosophy's NOMOS series, entitled Markets and Justice, a number of distinguished authors consider a variety of topics in the area where economics, philosophy, and political science join paths. Included are essays such as "Contractarian Method, Private Property, and the Market Economy," "Justice Under Capitalism," and "Market Choice and Human Choice." Authors include Joshua Cohen, MIT; Gerald F. Gaus, University of Queensland; Margaret Jane Radin, University of Southern California; and Andrzej Rapaczynski, Columbia University.
Essays on the justification, strategy, and limits of mass protests and political dissent
In Protest and Dissent, the latest installment of the NOMOS series, distinguished scholars from the fields of political science, law, and philosophy provide a fresh, interdisciplinary perspective on the potential—and limits—of mass protest and disobedience in today’s age.
Featuring ten timely essays, the contributors address a number of contemporary movements, from Black Lives Matter and the Women’s March, to Occupy Wall Street and Standing Rock. Ultimately, this volume challenges us to re-imagine the boundaries between civil and uncivil disagreement, political reform and radical transformation, and democratic ends and means.
Protest and Dissent offers thought-provoking insights into a new era of political resistance.
With 16 original essays all published here for the first time, Theory and Practice focuses on the relationship between philosophical tradition and everyday life in the Western tradition. In this comprehensive volume, Ian Shapiro and Judith Wagner DeCew have gathered contributions from some of the most influential thinkers of our generation including Cass Sunnstein, Jean Bethke Elshtain, Martha Nussbaum, Jeremy Waldron, and Kent Greenwalt.
What are the relations between philosophical theories and everyday life? This question, as old as it is profound, is the central focus of Theory and Practice. The contributors include some of the most influential thinkers of our generation, among them Cass Sunnstein, Jean Bethke Elshtain, Martha Nessbaum, Jeremy Waldron, and Kent Greenwalt. In sixteen chapters--all published here for the first timethe authors examine major attempts to reconcile theory with practice in the Western tradition from Herodotus, Plato, and Aristotle to Kant and Heidegger.
Considerable attention is devoted to the role of theory in judicial decision-making, debates between defenders of the value of pure theory and those who argue for the priority of practice, the political implications of theory, practical problems such as global warming, and the theoretical commitments of practitioners from Karl Marx to Vaclav Havel. One of the most expansive volumes in the NOMOS series to date, Theory and Practice will be of interest to philosophers, lawyers, and social scientists from a wide range of disciplines.
Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia, and Kosovo. All are examples where humanitarian intervention has been called into action. This timely and important new volume explores the legal and moral issues which emerge when a state uses military force in order to protect innocent people from violence perpetrated or permitted by the government of that state. Humanitarian intervention can be seen as a moral duty to protect but it is also subject to misuse as a front for imperialism without regard to international law.
In Humanitarian Intervention, the contributors explore the many questions surrounding the issue. Is humanitarian intervention permitted by international law? If not, is it nevertheless morally permissible or morally required? Realistically, might not the main consequence of the humanitarian intervention principle be that powerful states will coerce weak ones for purposes of their own? The current debate is updated by two innovations in particular, the first being the shift of emphasis from the permissibility of intervening to the responsibility to intervene, and the second an emerging conviction that the response to humanitarian crises needs to be collective, coordinated, and preemptive. The authors shed light on the timely debate of when and how to intervene and when, if ever, not to.
Contributors: Carla Bagnoli, Joseph Boyle, Anthony Coates, Thomas Franck, Brian D. Lepard, Catherine Lu, Pratap Bhanu Mehta, Terry Nardin, Thomas Pogge, Melissa S. Williams, and Kok-Chor Tan.
