Combining Philosophers

All the ideas for John Austin, Jack Joslin and Ian Dunt

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     specify just one area for these philosophers


7 ideas

24. Political Theory / B. Nature of a State / 2. State Legitimacy / d. General will
In 1794 France all individual and legal rights were suppressed by the general will [Dunt]
     Full Idea: In the French Revolution the general will replaced democracy, the separation of powers, the rule of law, and individual rights.
     From: Ian Dunt (How to be a Liberal [2020], 03)
     A reaction: I had some sympathy with the idea of the general will, but Dunt has persuaded me otherwise. It is the embodiment of the democratic problem of the tyranny of the majority.
24. Political Theory / D. Ideologies / 6. Liberalism / a. Liberalism basics
Over several centuries a set of eight main liberal values was established [Dunt]
     Full Idea: Over the centuries liberal values were established: freedom of the individual, reason, consent in government, individual rights, the separation of powers, protection of minorities, autonomy, and moderation.
     From: Ian Dunt (How to be a Liberal [2020], 13)
     A reaction: What's not to like? 'Moderation' might be a sticking point, for anyone who thinks that very large social changes are needed.
24. Political Theory / D. Ideologies / 6. Liberalism / d. Liberal freedom
No government, or the whole nation, can control an individual beyond legitimate scope [Dunt]
     Full Idea: When a government of any sort puts a threatening hand on that part of individual life beyond its proper scope, …even if it were the whole nation, except for the man it is harassing, it would be no more legitimate for that.
     From: Ian Dunt (How to be a Liberal [2020]), quoted by Ian Dunt - How to be a Liberal 4
     A reaction: The obvious question is what counts as 'proper scope' - and who gets to define it? If the individual can define that, then criminals can appeal to this principle. The state must be persuaded of it, then asked to stick to it during conflicts.
24. Political Theory / D. Ideologies / 6. Liberalism / g. Liberalism critique
Laissez-faire liberalism failed to give people the protections and freedoms needed for a good life [Dunt]
     Full Idea: Laissez-faire liberalism failed, because it did not offer people protections and real freedom - against discrimination, insecure work, educational disadvantage, lack of social respect, absence of representation. It was cold, distant, and ineffective.
     From: Ian Dunt (How to be a Liberal [2020], 13)
     A reaction: A very nice summary, which I take to be correct.
24. Political Theory / D. Ideologies / 14. Nationalism
Nationalism pretends that we can only have a single identity [Dunt]
     Full Idea: Nationalism pretends that there is only one identity, that we cannot be more than one thing at once.
     From: Ian Dunt (How to be a Liberal [2020], Today)
     A reaction: Dunt is a defender of liberalism, which assumes a wide degree of pluralism. Could I be a British citizen, but love France more than Britain? I don’t see why not, but it is not an ideal situation.
25. Social Practice / D. Justice / 2. The Law / d. Legal positivism
The existence of law is one thing, its merits and demerits another [Austin,J]
     Full Idea: The existence of law is one thing; its merit and demerit another. Whether it be or be not is one enquiry; whether it be or be not conformable to an assumed standard is a different enquiry.
     From: John Austin (Lectures on Jurisprudence [1858], p.214), quoted by Jens Zimmermann - Hermeneutics: a very short introduction 6 'Positivism'
     A reaction: It is impossible to contest this point, but the issue is whether there is nothing more to law than its written existence.
28. God / B. Proving God / 2. Proofs of Reason / b. Ontological Proof critique
God can't have silly perfections, but how do we decide which ones are 'silly'? [Joslin]
     Full Idea: It is clear that God cannot have all conceivable perfections, because otherwise he would have absurd perfections (like being the perfect prawn sandwich), so a line must be drawn, and how are we to decide which perfections are appropriate and essential?
     From: Jack Joslin (talk [2006]), quoted by PG - Db (ideas)
     A reaction: This is an excellent question for curbing the absurdities of those who want to load God with every good thing that can possibly be conceived. Is the God who is also a perfect prawn sandwich more perfect than the one who isn't?