The question of drug policy is a controversial and much debated issue in the political sphere. It is my view that any judicial policy has to be based in an ethical idea about the individual, and that the connection and analysis between ethical perspectives on the individual and the enforcing of laws with regards to the actions of individuals has to be a well-established one. In this paper I will start from the assumption that this is not the case when it comes to drug laws, and I will therefore review two popular ethical theories about the individual, and then argue that philosophical liberalism, rather than communitarianism, is the superior ethical theory because of the inherent problems of relativism within communitarianism. I will then review some common arguments for and against the prohibition of drugs, to see how well they will fare, in terms of being compatible with philosophical liberalism. I will then return to communitarianism to look at its most valuable critique of the liberal position, to then offer a compromise position between the two theories that is fully compatible with philosophical liberalism, but that also takes into account the most valuable objection from communitarianism. It is my hope that the solution I offer will be grounded in ethical theories about the individual, and in fact, manages to be based in philosophical liberalism while also incorporating the strongest objection from the communitarianist position, thereby taking the strengths offered by both theories into account.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA1/oai:DiVA.org:umu-140165 |
| Date | January 2017 |
| Creators | Petersson, Filip |
| Publisher | Umeå universitet, Institutionen för idé- och samhällsstudier |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | Swedish |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis, text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.0024 seconds