Political Obligation in the World Society
Jonathan Trejo-Mathys
Boston College
Date: October 2, 2013
Abstract
Political philosophers have traditionally attempted to show that, provided certain conditions are met, there can be legitimate political authorities whose laws each citizen or subject ought to obey (and whose institutions they ought to support) for moral reasons, and not simply out of fear of punishment or for personal advantage. Beginning with Kant, and moving forward to debates surrounding monistic interpretations of international law and the nature of human rights, Professor Trejo-Mathys will offer some reflections on two different, but probably compatible, Kantian ways to think of political obligation from a world society perspective: one āfoundationalist,ā and one evolutionary, communicative and political.
Speaker Bio
Jonathan Trejo-MathysĀ is an assistant professor of philosophy at Boston College. His research interests lie in social and political philosophy (political authority, political obligation, global justice, transnational democracy), moral philosophy (Kant and the Kantian tradition in ethics and metaethics), and Habermas and the Frankfurt School tradition of "critical social theory." His recent scholarly publications have addressed Habermas and democratic law; Rorty and liberal democracy and religion; and Rawlsian critical theory and the World Trade Organization (forthcoming). He received his PhD in 2009 from Northwestern University.
Event Photos
Boston College philosophy professor Jonathan Trejo-Mathys at the Boisi Center on October 2, 2013.
Photos by Christopher Soldt, MTS Photography.
Event Recap
At a Boisi Center luncheon on October 2, Boston College philosophy professor Jonathan Trejo-Mathys discussed how philosophy can help us understand our moral obligations in an increasingly connected world.
In April 2013 an eight-story Bangladeshi textile factory collapsed, killing over 1,100 workers. Recalling the gruesome accident and the dismal working conditions that preceded it, Trejo-Mathys argued that Americans need to better understand how our close business connections to Bangladeshi workers tie us to their safety and welfare. (He himself was wearing a shirt made in that country, Trejo-Mathys noted.) When industrial disasters occur in the United States, such as the 1911 fire that killed nearly 150 workers at the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory in New York City, Americans frequently strengthen laws that protect workplace safety. Shouldnāt we be obligated to demand the same for Bangladeshis when we buy the products they make in their factories? Or are the differences in our societies too great to expect American-style worker protections?
To make his case, Trejo-Mathys argued that a āworld societyā now exists that is rooted in our global interconnectedness and generates moral claims on individuals and groups within that large society. Immanuel Kant properly recognized in the eighteenth century that the āviolation of rights in one place on the earth [is] felt everywhere.ā In our time, states and corporations will be the primary actors that must bring change, since they are the locus of power in the world today.
Drawing upon Kantian and neo-Kantian arguments about the foundations of moral obligation, Trejo-Mathys refuted schools of thought that deny the existence of international moral norms (āIR realismā) or claim such norms to be too thin to be broadly applicable (the āEnglish Schoolā). Neither alternative, he argued, accurately capture the realities of contemporary life, nor provides a solid guide for members of a world society.
Read More
Further Reading
Jonathan Trejo-Mathys, āAuthority, Legitimacy and Epistemic Accounts of Democratic Law: Estlund vs. Habermas,ā 2013.
Jonathan Trejo-Mathys, ā,ā inĀ Philosophy and Social Criticism,Ā July 23, 2012.
Jonathan Trejo-Mathys, ā,ā forthcoming inĀ Constellations: An International Journal of Critical and Democratic Theory.
Immanuel Kant, ā,ā and ā,ā fromĀ Metaphysics of Morals, both in Pauline Kleingeld, ed., Toward Perpetual PeaceĀ and Other Writings on Politics, Peace, and History, (New Haven, Yale University Press, 2006).
JĆ¼rgen Habermas, ā,ā inĀ Constellations: An International Journal of Critical and Democratic Theory,Ā December, 2008.
JĆ¼rgen Habermas, āDoes the Constitutionalization of International Law Still Have a Chance?ā inĀ The Divided WestĀ (Malden, MA, Polity, 2006).
George Klosko, ā,ā inĀ Political Theory, March 12, 2009.
Hans Kelsen, āSovereignty,ā inĀ Normativity and Norms: Critical Perspectives on Kelsenian ThemesĀ (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1998).
Joseph G. Starke, ā,ā inĀ The British Year Book of International Law,Ā (London, Oxford University Press, 1936).
Edward Rothstein, ā,ā inĀ The New York Times, January 9, 2006.
Tyler Cowen, ā,ā inĀ The New York Times, March 16, 2013.
Joseph OāNeil, ā,ā inĀ The Atlantic,Ā August 1, 2009.
In the News
October 8Ā , in which at least 10 people died and dozens were injured, raises questions about the obligation of individuals, states, and corporations to improve working conditions in the developing world. On October 2, ņņņ½Ö±²„ philosophy professorĀ Jonathan Trejo-MathysĀ discussed political obligation in an increasingly interconnected, international world society.