Abstract
Like being able to drive a car, being autonomous is a socially attributed, claimed, and contested status. Normative debates about criteria for autonomy (and what autonomy entitles one to) are best understood, not as debates about what autonomy, at core, really is, but rather as debates about the relative merits of various possible packages of thresholds, entitlements, regulations, values, and institutions. Within different regimes of autonomy, different criteria for (degrees of) autonomy become authoritative. Neoliberal, solidaristic, and perfectionist regimes entail conflicting understandings of what gets you autonomy and what autonomy gets youfor example, in relation to policies regarding physician-assisted suicide or financial support for senior citizens. In light of this, justifying a particular understanding of autonomy is inseparable from the task of arguing for the context-specific merits of a regime of autonomy as a whole and in relation to other ethical and political commitments.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 355-368 |
| Number of pages | 14 |
| Journal | Ethical Theory and Moral Practice |
| Volume | 17 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 1 Jun 2014 |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being
Keywords
- paternalism
- JHA
- autonomy
- Competency
- Pragmatism
- Ascriptivism
- Solidarism
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Regimes of Autonomy'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver