期刊名称：Reason Papers : A Journal of Interdisciplinary Normative Studies
印刷版ISSN：0363-1893
出版年度：2012
卷号：34
期号：2
页码：133-143
出版社：Reason Papers
摘要：In this journal in 2010 we published an article entitled “Direct and Overall Liberty: Areas and Extent of Disagreement.”1 In the next volume (2011), two comments on our article were published, one by Walter Block and one by Claudia Williamson. Here, we reply to each. Our 2010 article explores possible disagreement between direct and overall liberty. Direct liberty corresponds to the more inherent or immediate aspects of a policy reform (and its concomitant enforcement), while overall liberty subsumes also the indirect, or wider and long-run, aspects and effects of the policy reform. Both direct and overall liberty are important, and each has virtues relative to the other. The virtue of direct liberty is its concreteness and definiteness. The virtue of overall liberty is its more extensive view of an action’s consequences in terms of liberty. If direct and overall liberty often disagree, then there is ambiguity in saying whether a policy or action augments “liberty,” and critics will contend that “liberty” is meaningless or illusory. The article explores eleven possible areas of disagreement between direct and overall liberty. We maintain that some areas of possible disagreement are genuine and perhaps significant. Yet we argue that on the whole the main tendency is for direct and overall liberty to agree. Thus, we may maintain a focus on direct liberty and presume that the results also go for overall liberty, while being ready to consider the limitations of that presumption.
