In “Starving for Virtue? Eudaimonism and Public Reason versus Rothbardianism,” Kevin V. continues to defend the compatibility of public-reason liberalism with eudaimonism. I continue to dissent. Death Before Dishonour Let’s…
Some of my academic work deals with international issues. As a result, I read a lot about the philosophy of human rights. It’s hard to read this literature without noticing…
Two days ago, Roderick argued that eudaimonism provides an attractive moral foundation for the non-aggression principle despite the claims of public reason liberals. Here I try to show that his…
Kevin V. thinks eudaimonism makes a better fit with public-reason liberalism than with NAP. By contrast, I don’t think eudaimonism and public-reason liberalism are compatible. Eudaimonism is a “comprehensive doctrine,”…
Roderick and I have been around the block on the relationship between eudaimonism and self-ownership/non-aggression principles (SOP/NAP). Roderick thinks eudaimonism, properly understood, vindicates SOP/NAP as principles of justice, whereas I…
Zwolinski and Smith have already discovered that much of their disagreement is verbal, rather than substantive. But there are some real differences here. In an earlier post, Matt wrote: The…