Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. (1 other version)Altruism, Righteousness, and Myopia.T. Clark Durant & Michael Weintraub - 2011 - Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society 23 (3):257-302.
    Twenty years ago Leif Lewin made the case that altruistic motives are more common than selfish motives among voters, politicians, and bureaucrats. We propose that motives and beliefs emerge as reactions to immediate feedback from technical-causal, material-economic, and moral-social aspects of the political task environment. In the absence of certain kinds of technical-causal and material-economic feedback, moral-social feedback leads individuals to the altruism Lewin documents, but also to righteousness (moralized regard for the in-group and disregard for the out-group) and myopia (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • (1 other version)Altruism, righteousness, and myopia.T. Clark Durant & Michael Weintraub - 2011 - Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society 23 (3):257-302.
    ABSTRACT Twenty years ago Leif Lewin made the case that altruistic motives are more common than selfish motives among voters, politicians, and bureaucrats. We propose that motives and beliefs emerge as reactions to immediate feedback from technical-causal, material-economic, and moral-social aspects of the political task environment. In the absence of certain kinds of technical-causal and material-economic feedback, moral-social feedback leads individuals to the altruism Lewin documents, but also to righteousness (moralized regard for the in-group and disregard for the out-group) and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Freedom for the Future: The Independent Value of Freedom in Light of Uncertainty.S. Phineas Upham - 2009 - Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society 21 (4):437-446.
    ABSTRACT Both classical and modern liberals tend to treat freedom of choice as if it is intrinsically valuable—regardless of what is chosen. They fear that treating freedom as, instead, instrumental only to good choices might open the door to paternalism if a polity were to decide that people were making bad choices. A middle course would be to treat freedom as independently valuable. On the one hand, the independent value of freedom does not treat all choices as good as long (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark