Lloyd’s Orthodoxy
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 20394284 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Luciano Venezia (0000-0002-7647-7775, Universidad Nacional de Quilmes - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y TécnicasArgentina, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2013 |
| Volume | 26 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 171-184 |
| Publication date | 2013-01-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Hobbes Studies (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0921-5891 • E-ISSN: 1875-0257 |
| Publisher | Walter de Gruyter GmbH (PUBLISHER • DE) |
| DOI | 10.1163/18750257-02602001 |
| OpenAlex | W1986938558 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 2 |
In this paper, I will show that Lloyd’s reading of Hobbes’s account of political obedience is substantially similar to the mainstream philosophical interpretation. In particular, both include an “orthodox” interpretation of Hobbes’s political and legal philosophy. On the orthodox interpretation, the reasonableness of a choice is determined by the “weight” or “balance” of reasons. Subjects have reason to obey the law because so acting best satisfies their different desires and interests. I will argue that the practical reasoning that takes into consideration transcendent interests, and the reasoning that takes into account mundane interests, are structurally similar. The difference between them lies in the fact that transcendent interests always outweigh other first-order considerations, whilst the relative weight of mundane interests always enters into a calculation of the “balance” of reasons to be assessed each time
Economics · Epistemology · Mainstream · Obedience · Orthodoxy · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Theology · Law · Philosophy · Political Philosophy and Ethics · Psychology · Seventeenth-Century Political and Philosophical Thought · War, Ethics, and Justification
| Highly cited | No |
|---|