Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T13:14:13.179Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On Okin’s critique of libertarianism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2020

Daniel J. Hicks
Daniel J. Hicks*
Affiliation:
Rotman Institute of Philosophy, Western University, London, ON, Canada
*
*Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Susan Moller Okin’s critique of libertarianism in Justice, Gender, and the Family has received only slight attention in the libertarian literature. I find this neglect of Okin’s argument surprising: The argument is straightforward and, if sound, it establishes a devastating conflict between the core libertarian notions of self-ownership and the acquisition of property through labour. In this paper, I first present a reconstruction of Okin’s argument. In brief, she points out that mothers make children through their labour; thus it would seem that mothers own their (adult) children; but this implies that the children are not self-owners. I then examine the two most common objections to this argument in the literature: mothers do not make children, and acquisition by labour includes an exception for persons. I give several replies to each objection, including an extension of Okin’s argument that I call Okin’s dilemma. This dilemma argues that the libertarian can avoid Okin’s conclusion only by requiring an involuntary property transfer. And this alternative, it seems, is just as unacceptable for many libertarians. I close with some speculation about the further implications of Okin’s dilemma for libertarianism.

Keywords

Susan Moller Okinlibertarianismfeminismself-ownershipproperty
Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Philosophy , Volume 45 , Issue 1 , February 2015 , pp. 37 - 57
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Journal of Philosophy 2015

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alstott, Anne. 2004. No Exit: What Parents Owe Their Children and What Society Owes Parents.Oxford:Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bader, Ralf, and Meadowcroft, John, eds. 2011.The Cambridge Companion to Nozick’s Anarchy, State, and Utopia.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boonin, David. 2002.A Defense of Abortion.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bou-Habib, Paul, and Olsaretti, Serena. 2013. “Equality, Autonomy, and the Price of Parenting.”; Journal of Political Philosophy 44 (Winter): 420–438.doi:10.1111/josp.12037.Google Scholar
Cohen, G. A. 1981. “Freedom, Justice and Capitalism.”; New Left Review 126 (March–April): 3–16.Google Scholar
Cohen, Joshua. 1992. “Okin on Justice, Gender, and Family.”; Canadian Journal of Philosophy 22 (2): 263–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curchin, Katherine. 2007. “Debate: Evading the Paradox of Universal Self-Ownership.”; Journal of Political Philosophy 15 (4): 484–497.doi:10.1111/j.1467-9760.2007.00288.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, Angela. 1981.Women, Race, and Class.New York:Random House.Google Scholar
Fried, Barbara. 2004. “Left-Libertarianism: A Review Essay.”; Philosophy and Public Affairs 32 (Winter): 66–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fried, Barbara. 2005. “Left-Libertarianism, Once More: A Rejoinder to Vallentyne, Steiner, and Otsuka.”; Philosophy and Public Affairs 33 (Spring): 216–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grebowicz, Margret. 2005. “Consensus, Dissensus, and Democracy: What is at Stake in Feminist Science Studies?”; Philosophy of Science 72 (12): 989–1000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jeske, Diane. 1996. “Libertarianism, Self-Ownership, and Motherhood.”; Social Theory and Practice 22 (Summer): 137–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kilpatrick, Dean Resnick, Heidi Ruggiero, Kenneth Conoscenti, Lauren, and McCauley, Jenna. 2007 February 1.Drug-facilitated, Incapacitated, and Forcible Rape: A National Study.Charleston, SC:National Crime Victims Research and Treatment Center.Google Scholar
Kittay, Eva. 1999.Love’s Labor: Essays on Women, Equality, and Dependency.New York:Routledge.Google Scholar
Locke, John. 2008.Second Treatise of Government. In Some Texts from Early Modern Philosophy, edited by Bennett, Jonathan.http://www.earlymoderntexts.com/lo2tr.html.Google Scholar
Machan, Tibor. 2006.Libertarianism Defended.Burlington, VT:Ashgate Publishing.Google Scholar
MacIntosh, Duncan. 2007. “Who Owns Me: Me or My Mother? How to Escape Okin’s Problem for Nozick’s and Narveson’s Theory of Entitlement.”; InLiberty, Games and Contracts: Narveson and the Defence of Libertarianism, edited by Murray, Malcolm 157–172Chap. 11.Hampshire:Ashgate Publishing.Google Scholar
MacIntyre, Alasdair. 1999. “Moral Pluralism Without Moral Relativism.”; InThe Proceedings of the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy, edited by Brinkman, Klaus. vol. 1:Ethics.Bowling Green, KY:Philosophy Documentation Center.Google Scholar
McKitrick, Jennifer. 2006. “Liberty, Gender, and the Family.”; InLiberty and Justice, edited by Machan, Tibor 83–102Chap. 3.Stanford, CA:Hoover Institution Press.Google Scholar
Narveson, Jan. 1988.The Libertarian Idea.Philadelphia, PA:Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Narveson, Jan. 2002.Respecting Persons in Theory and Practice: Essays on Moral and Political Philosophy.Lanham, MD:Rowman/Littlefield.Google Scholar
Narveson, Jan. 2003. “We Don’t Owe Them a Thing! A Tough-Minded but Soft-Hearted View of Aid to the Faraway Needy.”; The Monist 86 (3): 419–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Narveson, Jan. 2007. “Social Contract, Game Theory and Liberty: Responding to My Critics.”; InLiberty, Games and Contracts: Narveson and the Defence of Libertarianism, edited by Murray, Malcolm 217–240Chap. 15.Hampshire:Ashgate Publishing.Google Scholar
Nozick, Robert. 1974.Anarchy, State, and Utopia.Basic Books.Google Scholar
Okin, Susan Moller. 1989.Justice, Gender, and the Family.New York:Basic Books.Google Scholar
Perrett, Roy. 2000. “Libertarianism, Feminism, and Relative Identity.”; Journal of Value Inquiry 34: 383–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steiner, Hillel. 1994a.An Essay on Rights.Oxford:Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Steiner, Hillel. 1994b. “The Fruits of Body-Builders' Labour.”; InEthics and Biotechnology, edited by Dyson, Anthony and Harris, John 64–78.London:Routledge.Google Scholar
Steiner, Hillel. 2002. “Self-Ownership, Begetting, and Germ-Line Information.”; InA Companion to Genethics, edited by Burley, Justine and Harris, John 317–324.Oxford:Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Steiner, Hillel. 2008. “Debate: Universal Self-ownership and the Fruits of One’s Labour: A Reply to Curchin.”; Journal of Political Philosophy 16 (3): 350–355.doi:10.1111/j.1467-9760.2008.00318.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sterba, James. 1998.Justice for Here and Now.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vallentyne, Peter. 2000. “Introduction: Left-Libertarianism – A Primer.”; InLeft-Libertarianism and Its Critics: The Contemporary Debate, edited by Vallentyne, Peter and Steiner, Hillel 1–20.Hampshire, UK and New York, NY:Palgrave.Google Scholar
Vallentyne, Peter. 2002. “Equality and the Duties of Procreators.”; InThe Moral and Political Status of Children, edited by Archard, David and Macleod, Colin 195–211Chap. 11.Oxford:Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vallentyne, Peter. 2012. “Libertarianism.”; In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2012 Edition). Accessed July 23. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2012/entries/libertarianism/.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vallentyne, Peter Steiner, Hillel, and Otsuka, Michael. 2005. “Why Left-Libertarianism Is Not Incoherent, Indeterminate, or Irrelevant: A Reply to Fried.”; Philosophy and Public Affairs 33 (Spring): 201–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warren, Mary Anne. 1973. “On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion.”; The Monist 57 (1): 43–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed