The liberal state, it has been argued, must be neutral between different conceptions of the good. Honoring individual autonomy & embodying ideals such as fairness & impartiality, the doctrine of state neutrality is intuitively appealing. Working as a restraint for state actions it is however problematic. In this paper, a possible solution to this predicament is outlined. Drawing on the distinction between liberty & what gives worth to liberty, it is argued that we must never accept non-neutral restrictions of liberty itself, but may pursue non-neutral policies affecting the distribution of what gives worth to liberty & may impose taxes funding non-neutral state actions, although such taxation inevitable limits the worth of our liberty. It is suggested that we, by adopting such a policy of limited state perfectionism, can recognize the right to individual autonomy without having to restrain the state from doing the good it can. References. Adapted from the source document.
In recent years, ideas of conscience and the liberty of conscience have become ever more salient in public discourse. Historically, these concepts have been used to mark out a certain scope of freedom and protection in moral, political and legal conflicts. In our time, individual conscience is frequently used to legitimate objections to, for instance, military service and medical interventions like abortion and vaccination. So too in Sweden – a country widely described as one of the most modern and secularized societies in the world. In this volume, a group of researchers in history, human rights, law, ethics and sociology of religion address some of the most central issues around conscience and the liberty of conscience in Sweden from the middle ages to the present. By situating conscience and liberty in wider intellectual, social and political settings, the essays provide alternative ways of thinking about the most intractable problems surrounding these concepts – the relationship between law and morality, the tension between individual and collective freedom, as well as the role of religion in public affairs. This volume will create new avenues of research for scholars and students interested in challenges related to conscience and liberty: both those in ethics, politics and law seeking a historical perspective, and those in history who want to tie their studies to the present.
In this article, we reinterpret the current political turn in animal rights theory in terms of republican as opposed to liberal political theory. By appealing to the values of liberty and fraternity as well as equality, we argue for a conception of animal liberation from human domination and not from humanity per se. This establishes a basis of liberty and fraternity in our cooperative relationships with animals in a "zoopolis," or interspecies political community. We contend that such a basis for interspecies political cooperation is not available on the more traditional model of animal liberation, where rights are derived from weak equality of the species.
The Royal Academy of Sciences was an important organization in eighteenth-century Sweden. It brought together scientists and scholars contributing to a wide spectrum of areas, encompassing nature as well as society. But it also maintained close ties to the elite and the political establishment. The academy formed part of the institutional landscape of power and functioned as a consultive body and an arena for the upper echelons of the Swedish realm. The monograph sheds light on the political and economic outlook of the Royal Academy of Sciences during the period 1739–1792 against the background of its intimate connections to the ruling stratum. Not least the Hat Party, which dominated the Swedish political scene during the Age of Liberty, and the autocratic King Gustav III. The study shows that the members of the academy overall gravitated towards traditional viewpoints and that their conceptualizations of society were substantially affected by their interactions with the power holders. While some fellows offered new ideas in line with an increasing contemporary emphasis on spontaneous societal development and the capability of individuals to act responsibly on their own accord, such notions were by no means prevalent. Moreover, the book demonstrates that neither the academy nor its members constituted a passive tool for the elite and the powers that be. Rather, they engaged in self-promotion by attributing themselves a crucial role in the project of general improvement they envisioned and added to.
This article focuses on the justification of a positive & a negative attitude respectively towards judicial review. The analysis is performed by textual analysis of the texts of four authors with different opinions on the subject matter: Robert Dahl & Jeremy Waldron who have a negative attitude towards judicial review, & Erwin Chemerinsky & Ronald Dworkin who have a positive attitude. A theoretical model is being used for the analysis, which consists of different dimensions of the issue of democracy & judicial review. The study shows that there are important differences in the democratic values underpinning a positive & a negative attitude. There are differences of opinion on the balance between democracy as; process or substance, rule by the broad mass of people or rule by an elite, the spirit of the community or the rights of the individual. The analysis also points out that there are differences concerning the comprehension of the important democratic concepts of liberty & equality. Figures, References. Adapted from the source document.
In his famous essay On Liberty, John Stuart Mill divides individual acts in two categories; acts that only harm the acting individual himself, & acts that harms other individuals. The former is called 'self-regarding acts' & the latter is called 'other-regarding acts'. There has been a long debate between famous scholars about how to interpret Mill at this point. Some argue that Mill permit that (1) only other-regarding acts could be punished, & other argue that Mill support that (2) even self-regarding acts could be punished. I argue that Mill could not hold both of the positions at the same time, & if he does he must be guilty of a severe inconsistency. The analysis shows that interpretation (3) is most reasonable. One conclusion that follows is that Mills liberalism is not "radically individualistic," it is instead a perfectionistic form of political liberalism, including both radical & communitarian ideas. Tables, References. Adapted from the source document.
Society is facing significant challenges in transforming to a sustainable food system where healthy food is provided, while reducing the negative environmental impact. Yet, it is debatable whose responsibility it is to provide healthy, environmentally friendly food from sustainable food systems. As food retailers have huge power through their supply and placement, it has been argued that they could steer consumers towards sustainable choices. Shifting from nudging- and sustainability marketing initiatives towards retail led in-store choice restrictions have therefore been suggested to enable a sustainable food system but has not been executed to great extent due to the fear of losing consumers. The aim of the study was to explore consumer understandings of and attitudes towards retail led in-store choice restrictions aiming to reduce the negative environmental and health impacts from food consumption. This was assumed to provide insights regarding where the perceived burden of responsibility lies and in what ways food retailers could be a leverage point for shaping sustainable consumption. The study used a qualitative approach where four semi-structured individual interviews with Axfood, Coop, ICA and WWF as well as four semi-structured focus group interviews with consumers were conducted and continuously integrated with a literature review. A content analysis of the collected empirical data was conducted with the help of the theoretical framework following Kahneman's fast- and slow thinking systems, perceptions, the Functional Theory of Attitudes, nudging, choice editing and different types of paternalism. The results indicated that consumers have diverse attitudes towards paternalistic measures. Food retailers' choice editing strategies aiming to reduce the negative environmental impacts from food consumption were highly encouraged and accepted due to a perceived collectivistic responsibility for maintaining our common earth. On the other hand, food retailers' choice restrictions aiming to reduce the negative health impacts met great disapprovals, due to health limitations being perceived as an insult towards consumers' individual body, identity and liberty. However, eliminations contributing to a greater overall health- and well-being was encouraged only if executed by legitimate and trusted authorities with reasonable, non-profitable driving forces where a democratic society was at the foundation. Choice editing is not an easy strategy for food retailers to apply as it interferes with consumers freedom of choice but is necessary as nudging and sustainability marketing are too soft strategies to steer consumer's often irrational decision-making and will not be enough for a global, sustainable transition. However, food retailers alone cannot bear the responsibility- or be the only leverage point as governmental measures are needed. ; Samhället står inför betydande utmaningar när det gäller att omvandla till hållbara livsmedelssystem där hälsosam mat tillhandahålls, samtidigt som negativ miljöpåverkan minskar. Der är oklart vems ansvar det är att tillhandahålla hälsosam, miljövänlig mat från hållbara livsmedelssystem. Eftersom dagligvaruhandeln har enorm kraft genom sitt utbud och placering, har det hävdats att de skulle kunna styra konsumenterna mot hållbara val. Att skifta fokus från nudging- och hållbarhetsmarknadsföring till att dagligvaruhandeln införde val-begränsningar i butik har därför presenterats för att möjliggöra ett hållbart livsmedelssystem, men har inte genomförts i större utsträckning på grund av rädslan att förlora konsumenter. Syftet med denna studie var att förklara konsumenternas uppfattning om detaljhandelsledda konsumtionsval i butik i syfte att minska de negativa miljö- och hälsoeffekterna av livsmedelskonsumtion. Detta antogs ge insikter om var den upplevda ansvarsbördan låg och på vilka sätt dagligvaruhandeln kan vara en hävstång för att utforma hållbar konsumtion. Studien följde ett kvalitativt tillvägagångssätt där fyra semistrukturerade, individuella intervjuer med representanter från Axfood, Coop, ICA och WWF samt fyra semistrukturerade fokusgruppsintervjuer med konsumenter. De empiriska studierna genomfördes och integrerades kontinuerligt med en litteraturöversikt. En innehållsanalys av den insamlade empiriska datan genomfördes med hjälp av det teoretiska ramverket; Kahnemans snabba och långsamma tänkande, uppfattningar, funktionell teori om attityder, nudging, valredigering och olika typer av paternalism. Resultaten visade att konsumenterna har olika attityder till paternalistiska åtgärder. Dagligvaruhandelns valredigeringsstrategier som syftar till att minska negativ miljöpåverkan från livsmedelskonsumtion uppmuntrades och accepteras på grund av ett kollektivistiskt ansvar för att upprätthålla vår gemensamma jord. Å andra sidan mötte dagligvaruhandelns valredigeringsstrategier som syftar till att minska de negativa hälsoeffekterna stort motstånd, då begränsningar som rör den individuella hälsan anses vara en kränkning mot konsumentens kropp, identitet och frihet. Elimineringar som bidrog till förbättrad hälsa och ett ökat välbefinnande uppmuntrades endast om de utfördes av en legitim och betrodd stat med rimliga, icke-lönsamma drivkrafter där ett demokratiskt samhälle fortfarande bestod. Slutsatsen var att valredigering inte är en lätt strategi för dagligvaruhandeln att tillämpa eftersom det stör konsumenternas valfrihet, men är nödvändig eftersom nudging och hållbarhetsmarknadsföring är för mjuka strategier för att styra konsumentens ofta irrationella beslutsfattande och kommer inte att räcka för en global, hållbar övergång. Dagligvaruhandeln kan dock inte ensam bära ansvaret då statliga åtgärder också behövs.
