The Egalitarian Objection to Coercion

Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 105 (3):392-417 (2024)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

I develop an egalitarian account of what's objectionable about coercion. The account is rooted in the idea that certain relationships, like those of master to slave or lord to peasant, are relationships of subordination or domination. These relationships are morally objectionable. Such relationships are in part constituted by asymmetries of power. A master subordinates a slave because the master has more power over the slave than vice versa. Coercion is objectionable, I argue, because it creates such asymmetries of power and so creates relationships of subordination. This account, moreover, illuminates what's wrong with blackmail, exploitation, withholding aid, and compulsion.

Author's Profile

Adam Lovett
Australian Catholic University

Analytics

Added to PP
2024-05-06

Downloads
227 (#78,334)

6 months
227 (#13,413)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?