Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T16:59:47.042Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rights to Liberty in Purely Private Matters

Part I

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 December 2008

Jonathan Riley
Jonathan Riley
Affiliation:
Tulane University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

John Stuart Mill provides a classic defense of individual and group rights to liberty with respect to purely private or self-regarding matters:

The only part of the conduct of any one, for which he is amenable to society, is that which concerns others. In the part which merely concerns himself … directly, and in the first instance, … his independence is, of right, absolute.… From this liberty of each individual, follows the liberty, within the same limits, of combination among individuals; freedom to unite, for any purpose not involving harm to others: the persons combining being supposed to be of full age, and not forced or deceived. (1859, pp. 224–26)

Type
Essays
Information
Economics & Philosophy , Volume 5 , Issue 2 , October 1989 , pp. 121 - 166
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

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

REFERENCES

Arrow, K. J. 1963. Social Choice and Individual Values, 2nd edition. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Aumann, R. 1959. “Acceptable Points in General Cooperative n-Person Games.” Annals of Mathematical Studies 40:287–324.Google Scholar
Axelrod, R. 1981. “The Emergence of Cooperation Among Egoists.” American Political Science Review 75:306–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Axelrod, R. 1984. The Evolution of Cooperation. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Basu, K. 1984. “The Right to Give Up Rights.” Economica 51:413–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berger, F. 1984. Happiness, Justice and Freedom. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berlin, I. 1969. Four Essays on Liberty. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Buchanan, J. 1975. The Limits of Liberty: Between Anarchy and Leviathan. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Buchanan, J., and Brennan, G. 1985. The Reason of Rules: Constitutional Political Economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Campbell, D. 1988. “Equilibrium and Efficiency with Property Rights and Local Consumption Externalities.” Toronto: Department of Economics, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Devlin, Lord. 1959. The Enforcement of Morals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Feinberg, J. 1984–1988. The Moral Limits of the Criminal Law, Vols. 1–4. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gaertner, W., Pattanaik, P., and Suzumura, K. 1988. “Individual Rights Revisited.” Osnabrück, West Germany: Fachbereich Wirtschafts-wissenschaften, Universitat Osnabrück.Google Scholar
Gardenfors, P. 1981. “Rights, Games and Social Choice.” Nous 15:341–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibbard, A. 1973. “Manipulation of Voting Schemes: A General Result.” Econometrica 41:587–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibbard, A. 1974. “A Pareto-Consistent Libertarian Claim.” Journal of Economic Theory 7:388–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gray, J. 1983. Mill's Doctrine of Liberty: A Defence. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Harsanyi, J. C., and Selten, R. 1988. A General Theory of Equilibrium Selection in Games. Cambridge and London: The M.I.T. Press.Google Scholar
Hart, H. L. A. 1963. Law, Liberty and Morality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayek, F. A. 1967. “The Moral Element in Free Enterprise.” In Studies in Philosophy, Politics and Economics, pp. 229–36. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayek, F. A. 1973–1979. Law, Legislation and Liberty, Vols. 1–3. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Humboldt, Baron K. W. von. 1854. The Limits of State Action, edited by Burrow, J. W.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1969.Google Scholar
Lee, D., and McKenzie, R. 1987. Regulating Government: The Positive-Sum Solution. Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Locke, J. 1689. Two Treatises of Government, edited by Laslett, P.. New York: Mentor Books, 1960.Google Scholar
Maskin, E. 1979. “Implementation and Strong Nash Equilibrium.” In Aggregation and Revelation of Preferences, edited by Laffont, J. J., pp. 433–39. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
Maskin, E. 1985. “The Theory of Implementation in Nash Equilibrium: A Survey.” In Social Goals and Social Organization, edited by Hurwicz, L., Schmeidler, D., and Sonnenschein, H., pp. 173–204. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985.Google Scholar
Mill, J. S. 1832. “On the Use and Abuse of Political Terms.” In Collected Works, Vol. 18, edited by Robson, J. M., pp. 1–13. Toronto: University of Toronto Press; London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1977.Google Scholar
Mill, J. S. 1832–1833? “On Marriage.” In Collected Works, Vol. 21, edited by Robson, J. M., pp. 35–49. Toronto: University of Toronto Press; London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1984.Google Scholar
Mill, J. S. 1848. Principles of Political Economy. In Collected Works, Vols. 2–3, edited by Robson, J. M.. Toronto: University of Toronto Press; London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1965.Google Scholar
Mill, J. S. 1851. “Statement on Marriage.” In Collected Works, Vol. 21, edited by Robson, J. M., pp. 97–99. Toronto: University of Toronto Press; London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1984.Google Scholar
Mill, J. S. 1859. “On Liberty.” In Collected Works, Vol. 18, edited by Robson, J. M., pp. 213–310. Toronto: University of Toronto Press; London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1977.Google Scholar
Mill, J. S. 1861. “Utilitarianism.” In Collected Works, Vol. 10, edited by Robson, J. M., pp. 203–59. Toronto: University of Toronto Press; London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1969.Google Scholar
Mill, J. S. 1863. “Austin on Jurisprudence.” In Collected Works, Vol. 21, edited by Robson, J. M., pp. 165–205. Toronto: University of Toronto Press; London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1984.Google Scholar
Mill, J. S. 1869. “The Subjection of Women.” In Collected Works, Vol. 21, edited by Robson, J. M., pp. 259–340. Toronto: University of Toronto Press; London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1984.Google Scholar
Mill, J. S. 1879. “Chapters on Socialism.” In Collected Works, Vol. 5, edited by Robson, J. M., pp. 703–53. Toronto: University of Toronto Press; London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1967.Google Scholar
Nash, J. 1950. “Equilibrium Points in n-Person Games.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 36:48–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nozick, R. 1974. Anarchy, State and Utopia. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Phillips, R. 1988. Putting Asunder: A History of Divorce in Western Society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pressler, J. 1987. “Rights and Social Choice: Is There a Paretian Libertarian Paradox?” Economics and Philosophy 3:1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riley, J. 1985. “On the Possibility of Liberal Democracy.” American Political Science Review 79:1135–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riley, J. 1988. Liberal Utilitarianism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sen, A. K. 1970. Collective Choice and Social Welfare. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Sen, A. K. 1976. “Liberty, Unanimity and Rights”. Economica 43:217–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sen, A. K. 1977. “Social Choice Theory: A Re-Examination.”; Econometrica 45:53–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sen, A. K. 1979. “Personal Utilities and Public Judgements: Or What's Wrong with Welfare Economics?” Economic Journal 89:537–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sen, A. K. 1982. “Liberty as Control: An Appraisal.” Midwest Studies in Philosophy 7:245–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sen, A. K. 1983. “Liberty and Social Choice.” Journal of Philosophy 80:5–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sen, A. K. 1985a. Commodities and Capabilities. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Sen, A. K. 1985b. “Social Choice Theory.” In Handbook of Mathematical Economics, 3, edited by Arrow, K. J. and Intriligator, M. D.. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Sen, A. K. 1988. “Freedom of Choice: Concept and Content.” European Economic Review 32:269–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shubik, M. 1982. Game Theory in the Social Sciences: Concepts and Solutions. Cambridge and London: The M.I.T. Press.Google Scholar
Stephen, J. F. 1873. Liberty, Equality, Fraternity, edited by White, R. J.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967.Google Scholar
Sugden, R. 1981. The Political Economy of Public Choice. Oxford: Martin Robertson.Google Scholar
Sugden, R. 1985a. “Why Be Consistent?”. Economica 52:167–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sugden, R. 1985b. “Liberty, Preference and Choice.” Economics and Philosophy 1:213–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sugden, R. 1986. The Economics of Rights, Cooperation and Welfare. New York: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Taylor, M. 1982. Community, Anarchy and Liberty. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, M. 1987. The Possibility of Cooperation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ten, C. L. 1980. Mill on Liberty. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar