IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/polstu/v29y1981i3p376-391.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Liberty: A Correct And Authoritarian Account

Author

Listed:
  • LINCOLN ALLISON

Abstract

type="main" xml:lang="en"> Abstract. The criteria of conceptual correctness tell us something about liberty, but only a bare minimum. They tell us, as MacCallum puts it, that‘freedom is. always something (an agent or agents), from something, to do, not do, become or not become something; it is a triadic relation.’Within this form, many different approaches are permissible, depending on how the nature of agents or the list of valid constraints is interpreted. One sense of liberty can, though, claim conceptual primacy. It is that implicit in capitalist law and economics: the freedom of a man, as he is, given only a fair access to significant information, from the sovereign acts of the state, to live his life as he chooses. There are many good arguments for constraining liberty in this sense in the fields of education and environmental planning. These arguments are best expressed as arguments against liberty in its primary sense and not, as they so often are, as arguments for re-interpreting‘true’liberty to suit the writer's policy preferences.

Suggested Citation

  • Lincoln Allison, 1981. "Liberty: A Correct And Authoritarian Account," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 29(3), pages 376-391, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:polstu:v:29:y:1981:i:3:p:376-391
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/j.1467-9248.1981.tb00503.x
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Grielen, Saskia J. & Boerma, Wienke G. W. & Groenewegen, Peter P., 2000. "Science in practice: can health care reform projects in central and eastern Europe be evaluated systematically?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 73-89, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:polstu:v:29:y:1981:i:3:p:376-391. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0032-3217 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.