Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    No state possesses legitimate political authority over th... — Carmelics
    Home/Rights & Liberty
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    No state possesses legitimate political authority over the individual.

    Rights & LibertySocial Contract
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Every state is a form of despotism, whether ruled by one or many.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Despotic authority is incompatible with the egoistic individual's self-rule.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Self-rule takes precedence over any political obligation regardless of the state's form or the foundation of its claimed authority.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Legitimate authority can arise from fair procedures of consent, not merely from the content of commands (Rawls, Locke).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A state grounded in hypothetical or actual rational consent is not equivalent to despotism, which rests on coercion alone.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Equating all political authority with despotism commits a category error that dissolves a meaningful moral distinction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Self-rule without external coordination produces collective action failures that undermine each individual's actual capacity for self-determination (Hobbes, Rousseau).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.An authority that expands the effective freedom of individuals by securing stable conditions for agency can be legitimate on consequentialist-autonomy grounds.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Rights & LibertySocial Contract

    Connections

    1 topic

    Democracy & Governance1 linked

    Related

    A state grounded in hypothetical or actual rational consent is not equivalent to...An authority that expands the effective freedom of individuals by securing stabl...Despotic authority is incompatible with the egoistic individual's self-rule.Equating all political authority with despotism commits a category error that di...
    +4 moreShow less
    Every state is a form of despotism, whether ruled by one or many.Legitimate authority can arise from fair procedures of consent, not merely from ...Self-rule takes precedence over any political obligation regardless of the state...Self-rule without external coordination produces collective action failures that...

    Similar

    Reconciling individual freedom with state authority is necessary.81%The state compels obedience to its commands and affirms that these com...78%Interdependent individuals would consent to the establishment of state...78%The right of the state is constituted and limited by the power of the ...78%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: max-stirner
    View source passageHide passage
    On Stirner’s account, there is a necessary antipathy between the egoistic individual and the state. This inevitable hostility is based on the conflict between Stirner’s conception of autonomy and any obligation to obey the law. “Own will and the state”, he writes, “are powers in deadly hostility, between which no ‘perpetual peace’ is possible” (175). Since self-rule is incompatible with, and valued more highly than, any obligation to obey the law, Stirner rejects the legitimacy of political obli
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit