Citizen Preferences Matter: Against the Moderate Republican Conception of Freedom

Abstract In this paper, I argue that the most recent moderate republican conception of freedom is not sufficiently plausible in all relevant cases. The most recent moderate republican view does not capture the distinctive character of republican freedom, or freedom of the person, because it focuses exclusively on the type-difference of a supposedly powerful agent, not on the type-difference of those affected by that agent, such as civic-type or non-civic-type. This problem of focusing exclusively on the specific agent-type-difference becomes apparent when considering the possible worlds in which, according to the most recent moderate republican view, the subjects of interference lack freedom as non-domination due to the absence of effective institutional arrangements. In this paper, I show that this ultimately undermines the most recent moderate republican view even in possible worlds where individuals appear to enjoy freedom as non-domination due to the presence of effective institutional structures.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Ethical Theory and Moral Practice
Published
2025-04-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-025-10492-1
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Political Philosophy and Ethics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
8.52

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Citizen Preferences Matter: Against the Moderate Republican Conception of Freedom

Akira Inoue
1 citations
Ethical Theory and Moral Practice
Political Philosophy and Ethics
8.52
article

Citizen Preferences Matter: Against the Moderate Republican Conception of Freedom

Akira Inoue
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract In this paper, I argue that the most recent moderate republican conception of freedom is not sufficiently plausible in all relevant cases. The most recent moderate republican view does not capture the distinctive character of republican freedom, or freedom of the person, because it focuses exclusively on the type-difference of a supposedly powerful agent, not on the type-difference of those affected by that agent, such as civic-type or non-civic-type. This problem of focusing exclusively on the specific agent-type-difference becomes apparent when considering the possible worlds in which, according to the most recent moderate republican view, the subjects of interference lack freedom as non-domination due to the absence of effective institutional arrangements. In this paper, I show that this ultimately undermines the most recent moderate republican view even in possible worlds where individuals appear to enjoy freedom as non-domination due to the presence of effective institutional structures.

Ethical Theory and Moral PracticeVol. 28(4)
The University of Tokyo (JP)
University of Tokyo, Università degli Studi di Pavia, Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Political Philosophy and Ethics
8.52
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.