Ethical Theory and Moral Practice

, Volume 16, Issue 1, pp 21–33

Taking the Self out of Self-Rule

Article

Abstract

Many philosophers believe that agents are self-ruled only when ruled by their (authentic) selves. Though this view is rarely argued for explicitly, one tempting line of thought suggests that self-rule is just obviously equivalent to rule by the self. However, the plausibility of this thought evaporates upon close examination of the logic of ‘self-rule’ and similar reflexives. Moreover, attempts to rescue the account by recasting it in negative terms are unpromising. In light of these problems, this paper instead proposes that agents are self-ruled only when not ruled by others. One reason for favouring this negative social view is its ability to yield plausible conclusions concerning various manipulation cases that are notoriously problematic for nonsocial accounts of self-rule. A second reason is that the account conforms with ordinary usage. It is concluded that self-rule may be best thought of as an essentially social concept.

Keywords

Self-rule Autonomy Agency Manipulation 

References

  1. Blackford LB, (2010) Panel Approves Compromise Bill to Make College Transfers Easier, Lexington Herald-Leader, March 19.Google Scholar
  2. Boud D (1981) ed. Developing Student Autonomy in Learning, Nichols Publishing CompanyGoogle Scholar
  3. Buss S (2005) Valuing Autonomy and Respecting Persons: Manipulation, seduction, and the basis of moral constraints. Ethics 115(2):195–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chishi H (2010) NSCN-IM Rejects Autonomy. The Calcutta Telegraph, March, 19Google Scholar
  5. Christman J (1991) Autonomy and Personal History, Canadian Journal of Philosophy 21.Google Scholar
  6. Christman J (2007) Autonomy, History, and the Subject of Justice, Social Theory and Practice 33.Google Scholar
  7. Christman J (2009) The Politics of Persons: Individual autonomy and socio-historical selves, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Cohen GA (1996) Reason, Humanity, and the Moral Law. In C. Korsgaard, The Sources of Normativity, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Datta D, Grant J (1990) Relationships Between Type of Acquisition, the Autonomy Given to the Acquired Firm, and Acquisition Success: An empirical analysis, Journal of Management 16.Google Scholar
  10. Ekstrom LW (1993) A Coherence Theory of Autonomy. Philos Phenomenol Res 53:599–616CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ekstrom L (2005) Autonomy and Personal Integration, in Personal Autonomy, ed. J. S. Taylor, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Frankfurt HG (1971) Freedom of the Will and the Concept of a Person. J Philos 68(1):5–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Frankfurt HG (1975) Three Concepts of Free Action. Proc Aristot Soc 49:113–25Google Scholar
  14. Frankfurt HG (1999) Autonomy, Necessity, and Love, in Necessity, Volition, and Love, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Frankfurt HG (2002) Reply to Jonathan Lear, in Contours of Agency: Essays on themes from Harry Frankfurt, ed. S. Buss and L. Overton, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar
  16. Friedman M (2003) Autonomy, Gender, Politics, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Haselager WFG (2005) Robotics, Philosophy and the Problems of Autonomy. Pragmat Cogn 13:518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hobbes T (1996) Leviathan, ed. R. Tuck, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Hoover K (2010) Consumer Bureau at Federal Reserve would have Autonomy, Phoenix Business Journal, March 19Google Scholar
  20. Korsgaard CM (2010) Self-Constitution: Agency, identity, and integrity, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  21. McKenna, 2005. The Relationship between Autonomous and Morally Responsible Agency, in Personal Autonomy, ed. J. S. Taylor, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Mele AR (1995) Autonomous Agents: From self-control to autonomy, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Mele AR (2006) Free Will and Luck, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Mele AR (2008) Manipulation, Compatibilism, and Moral Responsibility. The Journal of Ethics 12(3–4):263–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Meyers DT (1989) Self, Society, and Personal Choice, Columbia University PressGoogle Scholar
  26. Meyers DT (2000) Intersectional Identity and the Authentic Self? Opposites Attract!, in Relational Autonomy: Feminist Perspectives on Autonomy, Agency, and the Social Self, ed. C. Mackenzie and N. Stoljar, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Moran R (2002) Frankfurt on Identification: Ambiguities of activity in mental life, in Contours of Agency: Essays on themes from Harry Frankfurt, ed. S. Buss and L. Overton, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar
  28. Noggle R (1995) Autonomy, Value, and Conditioned Desire. Am Philos Q 32(1):57–69Google Scholar
  29. Plato (1987) Republic, trans. D. Lee, Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  30. Scanlon TM (2002) Reasons and Passions, in Contours of Agency: Essays on themes from Harry Frankfurt, ed. S. Buss and L. Overton, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar
  31. Spector, P. E. 1986. Perceived Control by Employees: A meta-analysis of studies concerning autonomy and participation at work, Human Relations 39.Google Scholar
  32. Velleman JD (1992) What Happens When Someone Acts? Mind 101:461–481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Velleman JD (2002) Identification and Identity, in Contours of Agency: Essays on themes from Harry Frankfurt, ed. S. Buss and L. Overton, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar
  34. Watson G (1975) Free Agency. J Philos 72:205–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Williams R (2010) State Schools Accused of Turning Pupils into ‘Well-Drilled Automatons’, The Guardian, March 19.Google Scholar
  36. Wolf S (1990) Freedom Within Reason, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyBirkbeck College, University of LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations