Three Anarchical FallaciesThree Anarchical Fallacies: An Essay on Political Authority


Reviews


"An original and valuable contribution to contemporary debates about state legitimacy and the relation of morality to law.  Edmundson's arguments are throughout imaginative and engaging...." —A. John Simmons, from the dust jacket.



"No bare synopsis of the argument can do justice to Edmundson's profundity, the care and depth of his reasoning, and the helpfulness of his engagement with the thought of contemporary scholars and philosophers long deceased.... A marvelous book." —Patrick Coby,  in ChoiceChosen as a Choice "Outstanding Academic Book" for 1999.



"Throughout, Edmundson's discussion is skillful and inventive....He has interesting things to say about the relationship between morality and law and succeeds in calling into question several popular views.  But as a contribution to our understanding of political authority, the work's value is limited by oddness of focus...."  —George Klosko, in The Review of Politics.



"Edmundson sets an almost unprecedented standard of brevity, clarity and profundity. Here is a monograph which in less than two-hundred pages tackles some of the most intricate questions of state legitimacy—identifies salient issues, surveys theoretical background, does not shirk detailed analyses, and reaches important conclusions—and it does all this in a user-friendly textbook style that hardly presupposes any prior knowledge of the subject....Only one caveat about Edmundson’s dense but lucid style: There is no use trying to bring a highlighting pen to his book to mark main points. This is a book of main points, pruned of so much as one superfluous paragraph or frivolous digression. If only for Edmundson’s exceptional expository skills—a much-neglected virtue in philosophical writing—his book would deserve a wide readership. However, that is by no means its only virtue. Indeed, this work ranks, in my view, among the most important contributions to its “discursive field” (to use fashionable jargon that Edmundson would surely avoid) that has appeared in years...."  —Kristjan Kristjansson, in Mind.



"The 'fallacies' in the title are three assumptions which stand as obstacles to finding a successful account of state legitimacy.  They are shared by a broad range of political theorists, but notably favor the position of the philosophical anarchist.... Edmundson examines these assumption in impressive detail, deploying interesting, if controversial, arguments for rejecting them.  If his position is true, it is not an immediate refutation of the anarchist, but it would succeed in redrawing the terms of the debate.  Whether or not one is convinced by this ultimate aim, the book nevertheless poses a challenge to those interested in justifying these ubiquitous assumptions."  —Saladin Meckled-Garcia, in Political Studies.



"The three anarchical fallacies of Edmundson's title involve the relationship of law to, respectively, legitimacy, coercion, and morality...To each of these 'fallacies' Edmundson devotes three chapters of close and scrupulous analysis.  This analysis will not convince every reader that he has indeed exposed three widespread fallacies...I doubt that he succeeds in the first case...but the subtlety of [his] arguments and the richness of his insights are nonetheless remarkable.  Agree with him or not, anyone concerned with political authority, political obligation, and the relationship of law to morality will profit from a reading of Three Anarchical Fallacies.  But one will have to read as carefully as Edmundson writes.  The book abounds with helpful examples, including several drawn from legal cases, but hardly a word is wasted in exposition as argument follows argument....Despite the modesty of his aims, in sum, Edmundson has done more than point out the flawed reasoning that contributes to 'a fundamental distrust of state power.'  He has also pointed the way to a positive argument for the legitimacy of the state.  If he has not proceeded far along this path in Three Anarchical Fallacies, we should be grateful that he has cleared away so much of the underbrush and overgrowth that have obscured it—and hopeful that he will proceed farther in the future."  —Richard Dagger, in Law and Philosophy.


An "impressive combination of clarity, care, precision, focus, detail, and conciseness."  —Robert F. Ladenson, in Ethics.



"The deep-rooted [philosophical] anarchism in the US comes as a surprise to European readers, especially those raised in the legal and political philosophy of the Continent.  Outside his polis, man ceases to be man, becomes an altogether different species, but not so in the US.  The conviction in the US is that the state, the modern polis encompassing city as well as urbanized countryside [is] in need of explicit justification....[T]his ideology is the legacy from the first immigrants, the radicals, dissenters, levellers, and diggers who lost the English civil war and from later waves of European immigrants fleeing from tyranny, economic, social, and religious oppression.  Their mistrust of the states of origin has nourished a general mistrust of all states, the United States as well.  Edmundson sets out to demolish the foundations of this general philosophy....Throughout the book one sees the lawyer at work.  Law provides the cases and the lawyer's case method sharpens inherent problems in a clear and simple language...."  —Ib Martin Jarvad, in The European Legacy.

 


 

Edmundson's work on legitimacy & the obligation to obey the law is extraordinary--carefully done and written with a deep and broad understanding of the literature, both historical and contemporary.  ‘Highly recommended’ is just not enthusiastic enough. ─Laurence B. Solum, on his Legal Theory Blog.


Click here for more information about the book.