The Morality of Freedom¶
Raz, J. (1986). The Morality of Freedom. Clarendon Press.
Cited by¶
4 citations across 4 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Commensurability
- A quantity can be bounded (capped at 100%) while remaining incommensurable with other quantities; conversely, two unbounded quantities can be made commensurable through a common metric, a distinction Raz (1986) develops in his analysis of incommensurable values that retain magnitude without admitting cross-dimensional ranking.
This sourceIts chapters on incommensurability ('Incommensurability and Rough Equality', 'Denying Comparability', 'The Incomparability of Comprehensive Goals', 'Constitutive Incommensurabilities') develop the view that some values resist cross-dimensional ranking yet retain magnitude; supports the 'not-boundedness' contrast about incommensurable values. (Citation-fix: the prior annotation mistakenly described Raz's 'service conception of authority,' which is a different part of the book and irrelevant to this claim.)
Supported in partVerified against the publisher's abstract
The book's own abstract confirms incommensurability of values is a theme of Raz's analysis, but says nothing about bounded quantities, 100% caps, common metrics, or magnitude without cross-dimensional ranking.
“The realm of values is marked by pluralism, incommensurability, and a dependence on social forms.”
- A quantity can be bounded (capped at 100%) while remaining incommensurable with other quantities; conversely, two unbounded quantities can be made commensurable through a common metric, a distinction Raz (1986) develops in his analysis of incommensurable values that retain magnitude without admitting cross-dimensional ranking.
- Value Commensuration
- Value commensuration asks "Who decided on the metric, and at what cost?" and "What moral framework does this metric encode?"
This sourceDevelops the service conception of authority: legitimate directives function as exclusionary reasons that pre-empt the subject's own balance of reasons, distinguishing binding authoritative power from non-binding influence and persuasion.
- Value commensuration asks "Who decided on the metric, and at what cost?" and "What moral framework does this metric encode?"
Mechanisms¶
- Comparison Readout Annotation
- The guarding discipline is symmetry (the same downgrade and caveat rules applied to every comparand) and reserving the strongest label, non-comparability, for cases that genuinely resist a common frame rather than using it to duck a hard call — the real distinction being value incommensurability
This sourceDefines value incommensurability as the absence of a common ordering in which alternatives are better, worse, or equal.
- The guarding discipline is symmetry (the same downgrade and caveat rules applied to every comparand) and reserving the strongest label, non-comparability, for cases that genuinely resist a common frame rather than using it to duck a hard call — the real distinction being value incommensurability
Verification¶
Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 4 citations: 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Links previously used in the corpus¶
Before the registry existed this work was also linked 2 other ways.
- https://doi.org/10.1093/0198248075.001.0001 ×1
- https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Morality_of_Freedom/u3FZzAPkf08C ×1
Registry ID ref:33f129519b8e · see in the full table