ipl-logo

Arguments Against Robert Paul's The Defense Of Anarchism

729 Words3 Pages

Name- Abel Kebede Date- 12/02/2017 Course-Philosophy The Defense of Anarchism Anarchism believes in autonomy, self-governance. It regards a state has no right in imposing rules and regulations on individual’s free choice and actions and argue that the individuals have a right to govern themselves. Prominent philosophers who have supported this view are Benjamin Tucker and Henery Thoreau, however, in this essay, I will be arguing against Robert Paul’s the defense of anarchism. Robert Paul's argument can be divided into two parts: the concept of authority and the concept of autonomy. For Paul, authority is the right to command and at the same time, to get obedient. According to Paul, a state is a group of people who have a political authority over a certain population in a certain territory. He viewed autonomy as means of an individual is responsible for his own action, or in simple term, autonomy is self-governance. Paul suggested that there shouldn’t be a set of regulations that we would have to be abiding by. In other words, he regards that men should have autonomy and ruled not by the authority of a small group of people, named a state. However, this notion of state has been criticized because without the state society cannot maintain its peace and order. If there is …show more content…

In a place where no governing law and body exist, the society suffers from crime, confusion, disturbance, conflict, war etc, than prosperity. Broadly speaking, in the society where no state as governing institution, social development and growth shall be hindered and anarchism, economic stagnation and backwardness shall be prevailing over

Show More
Related

  • Rhetorical Analysis Of Declaration Of Independence

    1148 Words  | 5 Pages

    the authors explain in this section that if people are pushed into a government that does not allow them to uphold their rights, then they are in their own rights to overthrow the current rulers in the pursuit of a better, and more just mode of governing. these beliefs are outlined in the next paragraph, where parallel structures are used in order to create a more impactful and riveting read. “. . . That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government . . .” (CITATION NEEDED).

    Read More

  • Locke And Rousseau's Government: The Primary Ideas Of Government

    1677 Words  | 7 Pages

    This ideology is counter to that of liberalism as it infringes on the natural rights of its citizens, and it is undemocratic as this society would not have the consent of the governed as a whole. Furthermore, counters the rule of law because the author believes the authority should never be challenged, and therefore the author suggests that the authority is exempt of these laws. A thinker such as Hobbes would agree with the author of this source as he believed that without a strong government it would lead to nation wide chaos, such as that that the author describes through the use of the phrase, “A society that allows authority to be challenged will never succeed.”. Additionally, Locke would disagree with all parts of this source, as he believed that individuals know for themselves what is best and therefore should have the freedom to make their own decisions. For the second sentence of this source Locke and Rousseau would both disagree as they believed that consent of the governed was vital to society, which directly contradicts the authors issues with the challenging

    Read More

  • Ron Paul's View Of American Isolationism

    512 Words  | 3 Pages

    Being a free American in Paul's eyes mean we as individuals are responsible for our own lives and decisions. “Freedom to make bad decisions is inherent in the freedom to make good ones. If we are only free to make good decisions, we are not really free”. -Ron Paul

    Read More

  • Pros And Cons Of Thomas Jefferson

    1021 Words  | 5 Pages

    He also talks about the different kind of governments. He talks about societies without a government under force. The difference between a society government with people’s opinion, and a society with a force government is that the government that listens to individual’s thoughts actually takes them in consideration. While a force government does not really care about what society thinks. If they chose to do something they will do it with hesitation.

    Read More

  • Declaration Of Independence Unalienable Rights

    430 Words  | 2 Pages

    Jovania Andrade Social Ethics William Behun “The Declaration of Independence of the United States of America draws on the theory of Natural Law in its opening passage: We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights." “What does it mean for rights to be unalienable? What does it mean for rights to be natural? Is this different from claiming that these rights have a source in a divine creator?”

    Read More

  • Anne Bradstreet's Puritan Society

    1179 Words  | 5 Pages

    This distinctions might be due to the long history of the concept as it was already used to describe the “independence of Greek city- states” while, nowadays, it refers to a “psychological construct” (Hmel & Pincus 2002: 278). Still, there are several similarities as, for example, Friedman considers autonomy as “self-determination”(2003: 4) and Wiggins regards it as individual “agency” (1997: 1081). Both times, autonomy is valued as a freedom of decision. However, Baumeister assumes that the decisions are likely to be shaped by social norms acquired throughout life (2012: 286).

    Read More

  • Locke Vs Tocqueville Analysis

    1084 Words  | 5 Pages

    Locke’s definition of liberty depends on whether the person is in the state of nature, in which people are “without subordination or subjection” (Locke 101) or if they have formed into a commonwealth, or whenever “any number of men are so united into one society, as to quit every one his executive power of the law of nature, and resign it to the public” (Locke 137-38). In the Lockean state of nature, men have a “freedom to order their actions and dispose of their possessions and persons” (Locke 101). This freedom is still limited by what Locke refers to as the law of nature, or that “no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions” (Locke 102). He also defines the liberty of the state of nature as “not to be under any will or legislative authority of man” (Locke 109). In his form of commonwealth, there is more limited freedom, in which liberty is to “be under no legislative power, but that established, by the consent of the commonwealth” (Locke 110).

    Read More

  • A Short Summary: Two Concepts Of Liberty

    999 Words  | 4 Pages

    Two Concepts of Liberty Summary of the essay: In this essay, the famous political theorist Isaiah Berlin tries to differentiate between the notions of positive liberty and negative liberty. Berlin briefly discusses the meaning of the word ‘freedom’. He says that a person is said to free when no man or body of men interferes with his activity. He makes reference to many philosophers in the essay, but there is more emphasis on the thoughts of J. S. Mill and Rousseau, the former being a firm advocate of negative liberty while the latter believes strongly in the ideals of positive liberty.

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast Henry Thoreau And Civil Disobedience

    955 Words  | 4 Pages

    Throughout history, occasions arise in which a subjugated people disobey the authority of their government. Many of the individuals participating in these acts of disobedience cite a contradiction of beliefs as their primary motive for rebelling. In the article, “Politics drawn from the very words of scripture”, by Jacques-Benigne Bossuet and the article, “Civil Disobedience”, by Henry Thoreau, the authors both provide varying opinions on rebelling against authoritative figures. Bossuet argued that monarchs received their authority directly from God. This view required all subjugated people to obey their king without argument.

    Read More

  • Analysis Of Anarchism: What It Really Stands For By Goldman

    124 Words  | 1 Pages

    In "Anarchism: What It Really Stands For," Goldman points out the myth of anarchism. Anarchism is impractical, and it stands for violence and destruction, so it must be rejected as dangerous. Anarchists believe that the state is unnecessary because order and social harmony can arise naturally and spontaneously. They also view the state as evil because it goes against the principles of freedom and inequality. On the other hand, anarchists do not believe in laws because human knows what is good and bad and how to act appropriately in the society.

    Read More

  • Henry David Thoreau's Civil Disobedience

    1371 Words  | 6 Pages

    A government’s improvement revolves solely around recognizing the rights of men: “There will never be a really free and enlightened State until the State comes to recognize the individual as a higher and independent power, from which all its own power and authority are derived, and treats him accordingly” (Thoreau, 1847/1998, p. 146). The people form the government. A

    Read More

  • Rousseau Vs Thomas Paine Essay

    1232 Words  | 5 Pages

    He justifies the need for democracy, aristocracy and monarchy depending on location. The three philosophers use their judgment and prior knowledge on each other’s work to validate an ideal society, especially for the uprising continent of America. Governments are an established institution in every society. Though there are multiple types of governments, their purpose is fundamental to determining the influence on a civilization.

    Read More

  • Judith Shklar The Liberalism Of Fear Analysis

    1020 Words  | 5 Pages

    Previously mentioned, Shklar believes how the limited power to the state is the solution to individuals freedom and liberty not being in danger. She also believes that the liberalism of fear is not similar to anarchism. Anarchist’s tend to believe that people do not need state power or any rules of law to live peacefully, but Shklar suggests that rules are significant to liberalism in various ways because the rules of law will protects ones individual

    Read More

  • Similarities Between Plato And John Locke

    1333 Words  | 6 Pages

    Only those who are born with true philosophical understanding can rule. In the Second Treatise by John Locke, Locke addresses the state of nature, which is essentially equality and freedom. Even though people have liberty, they still need to obey natural laws. On the contrary of Plato’s just city, Locke believes that absolute authority is not a civil government. A civil society is where the majority rules.

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast Hobbes Locke And Rousseau

    1740 Words  | 7 Pages

    This state of nature was the conditions in which we lived before there were any political governments to rule over us and it described what societies would be like if we had no government at all. In this essay I will compare the opinions given by each philosopher regarding their understanding of the state and the law. I will also discuss how their theories have influenced our understanding of the law today. Thomas Hobbes – Regarding the State and Law Firstly I would like to begin my discussion with Thomas Hobbes.

    Read More

More about Arguments Against Robert Paul's The Defense Of Anarchism

Open Document