Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorArneson, Richard
dc.date.accessioned2021-09-07T19:31:42Z
dc.date.available2021-09-07T19:31:42Z
dc.date.issued7/15/2013
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12648/3274
dc.description.abstractThe principle of patriotism says that we are morally required to favor our own nation and its people. But there is an opposed moral perspective: cosmopolitanism. The cosmopolitan regards herself as a citizen of the world and holds that national borders lack intrinsic, noninstrumental moral significance. The cosmopolitan view is that people are people, and our common humanity is the ground of our moral duties toward people. This paper examines some recent arguments for patriotism, and finds them all wanting. In the absence of any good argument for patriotism, perhaps we should consider cosmopolitanism.
dc.subjectPatriotism
dc.subjectCosmopolitanism
dc.titleIs Patriotism Immoral?
dc.typearticle
refterms.dateFOA2021-09-07T19:31:42Z
dc.description.institutionSUNY Brockport
dc.source.peerreviewedTRUE
dc.source.statuspublished
dc.description.publicationtitlePhilosophic Exchange
dc.contributor.organizationUniversity of California, San Diego
dc.languate.isoen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
phil_ex/vol43/iss1/2/fulltext ...
Size:
185.6Kb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Philosophic Exchange
    Philosophic Exchange is published by the Center for Philosophic Exchange, at the College at Brockport. The Center for Philosophic Exchange was founded by SUNY Chancellor Samuel Gould in 1969 to conduct a continuing program of philosophical inquiry, relating to both academic and public issues. Each year the Center hosts four speakers, and each speaker gives a public lecture that is intended for a general audience. These lectures are then published in this journal.

Show simple item record