prikaz prve stranice dokumenta Consent or public reason? Legitimacy of norms applied in ASPD and COVID-19 situations
  Download
PDF 334.82 KB
Scientific paper - Original scientific paper
Consent or public reason? Legitimacy of norms applied in ASPD and COVID-19 situations
Filozofija i društvo, 32 (2021), 4; 674-694. https://doi.org/10.2298/FID2104674B
Baccarini, Elvio

Citations:
,
Cite this document

Baccarini, E. (2021). Consent or public reason? Legitimacy of norms applied in ASPD and COVID-19 situations. Filozofija i društvo, 32. (4), 674-694. doi: 10.2298/FID2104674B

Baccarini, Elvio. "Consent or public reason? Legitimacy of norms applied in ASPD and COVID-19 situations." Filozofija i društvo, vol. 32, no. 4, 2021, pp. 674-694. https://doi.org/10.2298/FID2104674B

Baccarini, Elvio. "Consent or public reason? Legitimacy of norms applied in ASPD and COVID-19 situations." Filozofija i društvo 32, no. 4 (2021): 674-694. https://doi.org/10.2298/FID2104674B

Baccarini, E. (2021) 'Consent or public reason? Legitimacy of norms applied in ASPD and COVID-19 situations', Filozofija i društvo, 32(4), pp. 674-694. doi: 10.2298/FID2104674B

Baccarini E. Consent or public reason? Legitimacy of norms applied in ASPD and COVID-19 situations. Filozofija i društvo [Internet]. 2021 [cited 2025 April 12];32(4):674-694. doi: 10.2298/FID2104674B

E. Baccarini, "Consent or public reason? Legitimacy of norms applied in ASPD and COVID-19 situations", Filozofija i društvo, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 674-694, 2021. [Online]. Available at: https://urn.nsk.hr/urn:nbn:hr:186:018659. [Accessed: 12 April 2025]

Please login to the repository to save this object to your list.
Metadata
Title (english)Consent or public reason? Legitimacy of norms applied in ASPD and COVID-19 situations
AuthorElvio Baccarini
Author's institutionUniversity of Rijeka
Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences
Scientific / art field,
discipline and subdiscipline		HUMANISTIC SCIENCES
Philosophy
Abstract (english)
This paper extends Alan John Simmons’s conceptual distinction between Lockean (or consent) and Kantian (or justificatory) conceptions of legitimacy that he applied to the question of the legitimacy of states, to the issue of legitimacy of public decisions. I criticise the consent conception of legitimacy defended by Simmons, and I defend the Rawlsian version of the justificatory conception of legitimacy from his objection. The approach of this paper is distinctive because the two conceptions... More are assessed by investigating, using the method of reflective equilibrium, their respective prescriptions concerning the treatment of antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) and epidemiologic measures. I argue that the method of reflective equilibrium does not support the consent conception. Considering the issues of treatment of APD and of epidemiologic measures, I argue that the consent conception of legitimacy is not well-equipped for the evaluation of norms that are not strictly self-regarding. This causes a deficit of prescriptions for relevant social responses. Further, by considering the case of responses to epidemics, I argue that such a conception can avoid harmful consequences only by recurring to additional, and independent, premises. This does not cause incoherence but reduces the coherence of a normative system. Finally, the consent conception is not equipped to support social cooperation in an optimal way, which has proved to be necessary in critical conditions, like a pandemic. On the other hand, I argue that the method of reflective equilibrium supports the Rawlsian version of justificatory conception of legitimacy, because of its advantages in handling the indicated issues. In addition, I maintain that this justificatory conception is respectful of freedom and equality of agents as moral self- legislators, and, thus, it is not vulnerable to Simmons’s main criticism. Less
Keywords (english)
Languageenglish
Publication typeScientific paper - Original scientific paper
Publication statusPublished
Peer reviewPeer review
Publication versionPublished version
Journal titleFilozofija i društvo
Numberingvol. 32, no. 4, pp. 674-694
p-ISSN0353-5738
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.2298/FID2104674B
URN:NBNurn:nbn:hr:186:018659
Publication2021
ProjectNumber: IP-2018-01-3518
Title (croatian): Odgovori na antisocijalne osobnosti u demokratskom društvu
Acronym: RAD
Leader: Luca Malatesti
Jurisdiction: Croatia
Funding stream: IP
Document URLhttp://bib.irb.hr/1168393
Type of resourceText
Access conditionsOpen access
Terms of useLicence In copyright icon
Created on2022-12-19 07:55:31
accessibility

closeAccessibilityrefresh

If you wish to permanently save changes, click on Save, if not - your settings will be reset when you restart the browser.