Suchergebnisse

In pol'al sociol authority means power to command voluntary obedience. This power is causative, not coercive, although those who recognize a ruler's authority, by voluntarily obeying him from respect for certain of his attributes, may authorize him to use coercive power against those who do not. In legal discussion `authority' means not actual power, but power prescribed by pol'al rules. It is possible for a ruler to have `legal' authority without `sociol'cal' authority, or vice versa. Authority in the sociol'al sense is diff'ly evaluated depending on whether it is compared with naked force or individual liberty. The decision to accept someone as an authority may be rational or irrational, but acceptance of authority entails obeying commands of those in authority without considering whether those commands are rational or irrational. Men do not necessarily accept authority for any ends. If they do, the ends may be moral or immoral. HA.

Authority is one of the key issues in political studies, for the question of by what right one person or several persons govern others is at the very root of political activity. In selecting key readings for this volume Joseph Raz concerns himself primarily with the moral aspect of political authority, choosing pieces that examine its justification, determine who is subject to it and who is entitled to hold it, and whether there are any general moral limits to it. The readings – by such modern political thinkeres as Robert Paul Wolff, H. L. A. Hart, G. E. M. Anscombe, and Ronald Dworkin – examine the basic moral issues and provide an essential introduction to the debate about the nature of authority for all students of political theory. ; https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/books/1289/thumbnail.jpg

Intro -- About the Author -- Title Page -- Copyright Page -- Contents -- By way of an introduction -- 1 Identity and Authority -- 2 Authority and Origin: 'Why? Because I say so!' -- 3 Three Impossible Professions -- 4 Return (Darth Vader) or Change (Big Brother)? -- Intermezzo -- 5 The Age of Woman -- 6 Parents in the Plural -- 7 Your Money or Your Life -- 8 Mr Valdemar or Deliberative Democracy -- Conclusion -- Acknowledgements -- Bibliography -- Notes

This book launches a landmark four-volume collaborative work exploring the political thought of the Jewish people from biblical times to the present. Each volume includes a selection of texts-from the Bible and Talmud, midrashic literature, legal responsa, treatises, and pamphlets-annotated for modern readers and accompanied by new commentaries written by eminent philosophers, lawyers, political theorists, and other scholars working in different fields of Jewish studies. These contributors join the arguments of the texts, agreeing or disagreeing, elaborating, refining, qualifying, and sometimes repudiating the political views of the original authors. The series brings the little-known and unexplored Jewish tradition of political thinking and writing into the light, showing where and how it resonates in the state of Israel, the chief diaspora settlements, and, more broadly, modern political experience. This first volume, Authority, addresses the basic question of who ought to rule the community: What claims to rule have been put forward from the time of the exodus from Egypt to the establishment of the state of Israel? How are such claims disputed and defended? What constitutes legitimate authority? The authors discuss the authority of God, then the claims of kings, priests, prophets, rabbis, lay leaders, gentile rulers (during the years of the exile), and the Israeli state. The volume concludes with several perspectives on the issue of whether a modern state can be both Jewish and democratic. Forthcoming volumes will address the themes of membership, community, and political vision. Among the contributors to this volume: Amy Gutmann Moshe Halbertal David Hartman Moshe Idel Sanford Levinson Susan Neiman Hilary Putnam Joseph Raz Michael Sandel Allan Silver Yael Tamir.

Der Verfasser entwirft einen theoretischen Rahmen zur Erfassung von 'Autorität'. Er unterscheidet zwischen konjunkten (Interessenkongruenz zwischen Über- und Untergeordnetem) und disjunkten sowie zwischen einfachen (Autorität wird direkt von der Person ausgeübt, die mit Autorität ausgestattet ist) und komplexen Autoritätssystemen. Die Untersuchung solcher Systeme kann unter statischem oder dynamischem Aspekt erfolgen. Die statische Fragestellung untersucht Verhalten in Autoritätssystemen sowie fehlerhaftes Funktionieren des Systems (Beispiel: Bürokratie). Die dynamische Fragestellung untersucht das Problem des Ausstattens mit und Entziehens von Autorität (Beispiele: Revolution, Panik, Aufruhr). (WZ)