Lloyd's Orthodoxy

Autores
Venezia, Luciano Javier
Año de publicación
2013
Idioma
inglés
Tipo de recurso
artículo
Estado
versión publicada
Descripción
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.
Fil: Venezia, Luciano Javier. Universidad Nacional de Quilmes; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Centre d’Études Sociologiques et Politiques Raymond Aron; Francia
Materia
Lloyd
Law
Obedience
Authority
Reason
Nivel de accesibilidad
acceso abierto
Condiciones de uso
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
Repositorio
CONICET Digital (CONICET)
Institución
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
OAI Identificador
oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/28503

id CONICETDig_502caed865b2e3b4c10f46aa20948d67
oai_identifier_str oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/28503
network_acronym_str CONICETDig
repository_id_str 3498
network_name_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
spelling Lloyd's OrthodoxyVenezia, Luciano JavierLloydLawObedienceAuthorityReasonhttps://purl.org/becyt/ford/6.3https://purl.org/becyt/ford/6In 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.Fil: Venezia, Luciano Javier. Universidad Nacional de Quilmes; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Centre d’Études Sociologiques et Politiques Raymond Aron; FranciaBrill Academic Publishers2013-11info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfapplication/mswordapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/11336/28503Venezia, Luciano Javier; Lloyd's Orthodoxy; Brill Academic Publishers; Hobbes Studies; 26; 2; 11-2013; 171-1840921-58911875-0257CONICET DigitalCONICETenginfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/http://booksandjournals.brillonline.com/content/journals/10.1163/18750257-02602001info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1163/18750257-02602001info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas2025-09-03T10:06:49Zoai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/28503instacron:CONICETInstitucionalhttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/oai/requestdasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:34982025-09-03 10:06:50.106CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicasfalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Lloyd's Orthodoxy
title Lloyd's Orthodoxy
spellingShingle Lloyd's Orthodoxy
Venezia, Luciano Javier
Lloyd
Law
Obedience
Authority
Reason
title_short Lloyd's Orthodoxy
title_full Lloyd's Orthodoxy
title_fullStr Lloyd's Orthodoxy
title_full_unstemmed Lloyd's Orthodoxy
title_sort Lloyd's Orthodoxy
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Venezia, Luciano Javier
author Venezia, Luciano Javier
author_facet Venezia, Luciano Javier
author_role author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Lloyd
Law
Obedience
Authority
Reason
topic Lloyd
Law
Obedience
Authority
Reason
purl_subject.fl_str_mv https://purl.org/becyt/ford/6.3
https://purl.org/becyt/ford/6
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv 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.
Fil: Venezia, Luciano Javier. Universidad Nacional de Quilmes; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Centre d’Études Sociologiques et Politiques Raymond Aron; Francia
description 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.
publishDate 2013
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2013-11
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/11336/28503
Venezia, Luciano Javier; Lloyd's Orthodoxy; Brill Academic Publishers; Hobbes Studies; 26; 2; 11-2013; 171-184
0921-5891
1875-0257
CONICET Digital
CONICET
url http://hdl.handle.net/11336/28503
identifier_str_mv Venezia, Luciano Javier; Lloyd's Orthodoxy; Brill Academic Publishers; Hobbes Studies; 26; 2; 11-2013; 171-184
0921-5891
1875-0257
CONICET Digital
CONICET
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/http://booksandjournals.brillonline.com/content/journals/10.1163/18750257-02602001
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1163/18750257-02602001
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
application/msword
application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Brill Academic Publishers
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Brill Academic Publishers
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
reponame_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
collection CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname_str Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.name.fl_str_mv CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.mail.fl_str_mv dasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.ar
_version_ 1842269976406261760
score 13.13397