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
    The ideal state should not involve coercion — Carmelics
    Home/Rights & Liberty
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→The cosmopolitan ideal should be a worldwide republic of fraternal, non-authoritarian republics

    The ideal state should not involve coercion

    Rights & Liberty
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

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

    Topics

    Rights & Liberty

    Related

    A cosmopolitan order composed of ideal states would therefore also be free of co...A non-coercive cosmopolitan order takes the form of fraternal republicsThe cosmopolitan ideal should be a worldwide republic of fraternal, non-authorit...

    Similar

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Rights & Liberty
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    A cosmopolitan order composed of ideal states would therefore also be ...81%Either state coercion is morally acceptable, in which case no special ...77%If coercion is constitutive of rights, it cannot be secondary to the c...77%The state may use non-coercive means to promote individual or common g...77%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: cosmopolitanism
    View source passageHide passage
    Some critics argued in response that Kant’s position was inconsistent, because on their view, the only way to fully overcome the state of nature among states was for the latter to enter into a federative union with coercive powers. The early Fichte transformed the concept of sovereignty in the process, by conceiving it as layered, and this enabled them to argue that states ought to transfer part of their sovereignty to the federal level, but only that part that concerns their external relations

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective