Advertisement

Comment on Alan Peacock “The Future Scope for Self-Reliance and Private Insurance”

  • Peter Koslowski
Conference paper

Abstract

The emphasis that Sir Alan Peacock puts on self-reliance in his paper is in itself a value judgment. It is the value judgment that it matters whether you make an economic or some other decision yourself or whether it is made for you by someone else. Japanese scholars like, e.g., Yuichi Shionoya call this decision for self-decision “biblical.” This is enlightening, since behind the emphasis on self-reliance there is a whole interpretation of human existence that assumes that a decision for right or wrong taken by the individual him-or herself has a different quality from a decision for right or wrong taken for this individual by someone else. The shift from the quality of the decision as being right or wrong to the quality of the decision as being self-induced and free or enforced can be traced in philosophy in the transition from the interpretation of the human in Antiquity to the interpretation of human in the Judeo— Christian tradition. In Plato and Aristotle, it is stated that it is better to make the right decision when it is induced by someone else than to make the wrong decision by oneself. For Plato it is better to be ruled reasonably by someone else than to be ruled unreasonably by oneself.

Keywords

Welfare State Private Insurance Insurance Scheme Social Insurance System Compulsory Insurance 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Albert, M. 1991. Capitalisme contre Capitalisme. Paris: Editions du Seuil.Google Scholar
  2. Bismarck, O. von. [1884] 1981. “Rede vor dem Reichstag vom 15. März 1884 (Speech in the German Reichstag on March 15th, 1884).” In: O. von. Bismarck, Werke in Auswahl, Band 7. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.Google Scholar
  3. Forslund, A. 1997. “The Swedish Model: Past, Present, and Future.” In: H. Giersch (ed.), Reforming the Welfare State. Berlin: Springer (in this volume).Google Scholar
  4. Fuchs, V. 1976. “From Bismarck to Woodcock: The ‘Irrational’ Pursuit of National Health Insurance.” Journal of Law and Economics 19: 347–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Koslowski, P. [1983] 1994. “Versuch zu einer philosophischen Kritik des Sozialstaats.” In: P. Koslowski, P.H. Kreuzer and R. Löw (eds.), Chancen und Grenzen des Sozialstaats, pp. 1–25. Tübingen: Mohr. Reprinted In: P. Koslowski, Die Ordnung der Wirtschaft. Studien zur Praktischen Philosophie und Politischen Ökonomie, pp. 299–322. Tübingen: Mohr.Google Scholar
  6. Koslowski, P. 1996. “The Social State in the Postmodern. Ethical Basis of Social Policy and the Reform of Social Security.” In: P. Koslowski and A. Føllesdal (eds.), Restructuring the Welfare State, pp. 309–348. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  7. Offe, C. 1990. “Akzeptanz und Legitimität strategischer Optionen in der Sozialpolitik.” In: Chr. Sachße and H.T. Engelhardt (eds.), Sicherheit und Freiheit. Zur Ethik des Wohlfahrtsstaates, pp. 79–202. Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter Koslowski

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations