In defense of content-independence

Legal Theory 23 (3):143-167 (2017)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Discussions of political obligation and political authority have long focused on the idea that the commands of genuine authorities constitute content-independent reasons. Despite its centrality in these debates, the notion of content-independence is unclear and controversial, with some claiming that it is incoherent, useless, or increasingly irrelevant. I clarify content-independence by focusing on how reasons can depend on features of their source or container. I then solve the long-standing puzzle of whether the fact that laws can constitute content-independent reasons is consistent with the fact that some laws must fail to bind due to their egregiously unjust content. Finally I defend my understanding of content-independence against challenges and show why it retains a place of special importance for questions about the law and political obligation. Content-independence highlights that it is some feature of the law or law-making process in general that is supposed to generate moral obligations for citizens, not the merits of particular laws.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Upload history
First archival date: 2017-04-08
Latest version: 2 (2017-04-29)
View other versions
Added to PP index

Total views
404 ( #14,941 of 2,439,300 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
40 ( #17,761 of 2,439,300 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.