Are states justified because they promote the good?

What exactly need justification? What do states do?

They coerce, enforce, the state claims the right to impose moral duties on u
Social contract = justification of the state
Contract theory : contract to which individuals agree in a well defined social situation in which the
state doesn’t exist
Social contract= modern idea
Denies that some have a natural authority over others
Starts from a conception of free and equal persons who bind themselves
Accepts that individual and collective interests may not always coincide
Has the right structure to justify what states actually do

An alternative idea= non voluntarism

- Might coercion/authority not also be justified by reference to what they achieve?
Why do parents have authority over children? Why do doctors have authority over patients?
Why do firemen have authority over people? (When they say don’t start a fire here lol)
Its not normally because we agreed to it.
Does another agents having such power make our lives better? (In this case the state)
Does the states right to coerce make our lives better?
What should the states be promoting to make our lives better?
PLATO:
The states purpose : Plato didn’t believe there was a natural harmony
Human soul is composed of three elements:
1) Reason
2) Spirit
3) Appetite
These three are constantly in conflict – to lead a good life the reasonable part should be in control
Just person has knowledge of the good and rules themselves in accordance w the good
Some people have better knowledge of the good than others (hierarchy) = natural authority over
others == rule of philosophers
Rulers don’t have authority to rule because they are better but because they know the good better
1) We are not equally good judges
2) There is one objective individual and collective good
For this to work it implies that there is a general good that is good for everyone

Bentham – states purpose

The principle of utility:
- Happiness is important
- Everybody counts equally
- Rational criterion
- Simple decision mechanism
Against the state:
- Pain from state coercion
- Displeasure of obedience
For the state:
- Pleasure from protection against violence
- Pleasure from coordination
- Pleasure from collective goods
Justification: the good things outweigh the bad things
BUT doesn’t it seem wrong?
Exclusive focus on pleasure and pain is an odd measure of value
What if overall happiness requires you to sacrifice a lot?
Wouldn’t it imply that disobedience will lead to maximum happiness? If u know better than the state
then wouldn’t you disobey the state to maximize your happiness?

Contemporary liberal version:

What is the aim?
- Retain core intuition that the state has power to coerce/ command when that helps us lead
good lives
- Argue on the basis of liberal values: equality (we are all moral an political equals) freedom
(autonomy, we should all decide important issues for ourselves)
Joseph Raz:
It’s the goal of all political action to enable individuals to pursue valid conceptions of the good and to
discourage evil or empty ones
What makes a conception of the good valuable?
- Valuable goals ( knowledge, friendship, excellence )
- Freely and independently chosen ^
- From a sufficient range of diverse options ^
The state should advance the good life of each citizen, and it is justified to the extent that it does
that – but why should we grant it authority?
Service conception of authority:
Authority: helps coordinate our behavior, expertise, saves time and energy to deliberate, protects us
against own deficiencies in reasoning
- We can only get these benefits if we treat the states commands as reasons not to act for our
own judgement
Not inegalitarian: u only have power over me if this is to my benefit
Not illiberal: I retain my freedom of choice over most important questions regarding my own life
Three core worries:
1) We reasonably disagree about the good life – so how can the state justify its pursuit of it
2) Does this only establish piecemeal authority – if I have more expertise than the law doesn’t
it lack authority over me?
3) Just cause you’re smarter than me doesn’t give you a right to tell me what to