One Cheer for Constantinople: A Comment on Pettit and Skinner on Hobbes and Freedom

Hobbes Studies 22 (2):192-198 (2009)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Philip Pettit and Quentin Skinner find Hobbes's understanding of freedom as non-interference inadequate because it fails to appreciate what is wrong with a life lived as a slave. Though their critiques have some force, however, Hobbes's view of freedom has virtues of its own. It is highly sensitive to the fact that freedom is a matter of degree. It is also unlikely to mistake freedom for something else, like security or dignity. Moreover, Hobbes is not as unmindful of the dangers of servility as many think

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,518

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Reflections on Skinner and Pettit.Ian Shapiro - 2009 - Hobbes Studies 22 (2):185-191.
Freedom as Independence.Christian List & Laura Valentini - 2016 - Ethics 126 (4):1043–1074.
Reply.Quentin Skinner - 2009 - Hobbes Studies 22 (2):199-207.
Republican confusion and liberal clarification.Melvin L. Rogers - 2008 - Philosophy and Social Criticism 34 (7):799-824.
Freedom and Actual Interference.Jonah Goldwater - 2020 - Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy 17 (2).
Republican Freedom and Liberal Neutrality.Lars Moen - 2023 - Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy 26 (2):325–348.
Slaves, Prisoners, and Republican Freedom.Fabian Wendt - 2011 - Res Publica 17 (2):175-192.

Analytics

Added to PP
2012-03-15

Downloads
93 (#228,060)

6 months
17 (#181,567)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Chandran Kukathas
London School of Economics

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references