Everyday Ethics

The word liberal is usually understood as a synonym for a Democrat in the United States.  Ironically, a liberal in the U.S. is more comparable to a conservative in the U.K.  Nonetheless, there is an important sense in which all Americans are political liberals.  This philosophical term has more to do with what we value than whom we vote for.  Two philosophers, Todd Hughes and Lester Hunt, have given a detailed analysis of the meaning of this term, which we will summarize in order to better understand the foundations of our own political system.

The most important thing for a political liberal, not surprisingly, is the preservation of liberty.  Liberty is roughly conceived as the ability to live the sort of life that one chooses, whatever that happens to mean for the individual in question.  There are three essential components to a political liberal perspective:  autonomy, equality, and neutrality.

Autonomy is a concept that is thrown around a great deal among philosophers, with a good deal of disagreement regarding what that means.  Autonomy is the ability to be self-governed, to be able to do what one wants to do.  A minimal interpretation of autonomy says that the government cannot prohibit any activity, provided it is not exceedingly harmful to others, in the private sphere.  An extraminimal interpretation goes a bit further, stating that the government also cannot prohibit certain activities in the public sphere, even if they are somewhat harmful, in the public sphere.

Neutrality is perhaps the simplest component of political liberalism, primarily because it has only one interpretation.  A liberal commitment to neutrality says that a liberal will refrain from defining what the good life is for any individual person.  Your conception of the good life is largely up to you, and it is certainly not up to the government to decide.

Equality is the final key component of political liberalism.  Equality is the concept that all citizens in a liberal society ought to be treated as equals under the law.  The liberal commitment to equality says that no person or group is treated as inherently better than any other.  It too has multiple interpretations.  A minimal interpretation of equality says the government cannot enforce policies that benefit the strong at the expense of the weak.  An extraminimal interpretation of equality says that the government must engage in activities that equalize the already unequal playing field.

All liberals are committed to neutrality, but there is some wiggle room with regard to autonomy and equality.  There are basically two options.  One can be a narrow liberal, favoring equality over autonomy.  Or one can be a wide liberal, favoring autonomy over equality.  Autonomy and equality serve to counterbalance one another; as one is promoted more heavily, the other is inevitably infringed upon.

In the next couple of weeks, we will consider how different interpretations of liberalism lead to different views on a variety of social issues, as well as the challenge of holding a consistent position across social problems that are similar, but that we tend to treat differently.  For now, our goal is simply to say a bit about the value system that underlies our own political process.  So next time you hear about some new law or government policy, ask yourself it is something that a wide liberal, a narrow liberal, or no liberal could sign up for. 

About the Author

Elijah Weber is a graduate student at Bowling Green State University. He holds a Master's degree in philosophy from Colorado State University, and Bachelor’s degrees in sociology and philosophy from Chapman Univerity. He currently lives in Bowling Green, Ohio with his wife Laura, his newborn son Brandon, and his feline life-partner Monte.