BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//Moore Institute - ECPv6.0.0.1//NONSGML v1.0//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
X-ORIGINAL-URL:https://mooreinstitute.ie
X-WR-CALDESC:Events for Moore Institute
REFRESH-INTERVAL;VALUE=DURATION:PT1H
X-Robots-Tag:noindex
X-PUBLISHED-TTL:PT1H
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:Europe/Dublin
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0000
TZOFFSETTO:+0100
TZNAME:IST
DTSTART:20200329T010000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0100
TZOFFSETTO:+0000
TZNAME:GMT
DTSTART:20201025T010000
END:DAYLIGHT
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Dublin:20200326T130000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Dublin:20200326T140000
DTSTAMP:20260516T042754
CREATED:20200214T114426Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20200313T104558Z
UID:8623-1585227600-1585231200@mooreinstitute.ie
SUMMARY:POSTPONED - School of Political Science & Sociology Seminar Series: 'Conflicting political obligations: A response to philosophical anarchism'
DESCRIPTION:by Allyn Fives (Power\, Conflict and Ideologies) \nThis paper addresses two key aspects of A. John Simmons’s philosophical anarchism. First\, as a value pluralist\, he maintains that obligations are not conclusive reasons for action\, whereas overridden obligations are nonetheless genuine obligations. As a result\, we can be faced with genuine moral conflicts concerning our political obligations. Second\, according to his anarchist position on the grounds of political obligation\, citizens have obligations only when they have voluntarily entered into cooperative arrangements which they benefit from. Therefore\, most citizens of most modern states do not have political obligations. And that means actual conflicts between obligations will be extremely rare. \nIn response to Simmons\, Jonathan Wolff and George Klosko have each argued that most citizens of modern states do have political obligations\, and this can be shown by considering the diversity of grounds for obligations\, including mutual self-interest\, fairness\, justice\, and the common good. However\, they also conclude that\, although there is a plurality of obligations\, conflicts between them are extremely rare. \nIn this paper\, I try to show that Wolff and Klosko succeed in rejecting Simmons’s anarchist position on the grounds of political obligations\, but fail to reject his value pluralist position on moral conflict. The implication is that citizens are bound by diverse requirements\, including obligations to protect citizens from harm\, to promote the common good\, and to diminish unjust inequalities. Not only that\, conflicts between such obligations are not rare but are\, instead\, one of the characteristic features of political life for citizens of modern states.
URL:https://mooreinstitute.ie/event/school-of-political-science-sociology-seminar-series-conflicting-political-obligations-a-response-to-philosophical-anarchism/
LOCATION:Room 333\, Aras Moyola
ORGANIZER;CN="Niall%20%C3%93%20Dochartaigh":MAILTO:Niall.ODochartaigh@nuigalway.ie
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR