Home > Journals > JCRED > Vol. 31 (2018) > Iss. 2
Abstract
(Excerpt)
There are four very brief sections to my comment on Tebbe’s book. The first suggests some skepticism about social coherentism, and its hope to provide a neutral method for adjudicating disputes. I apply this skepticism in the second part to Tebbe’s discussion of what counts as “harm” and how to measure it. The third and fourth parts deal with my favored way of dealing with our deep disagreements and compromises when it comes to associations and employment. I should add here that nothing I say is meant to take away from Tebbe’s achievement in his book. The writing is elegant; the reasoning sound. I would consider it a high compliment if my remarks here were read as merely pointing out differences in how to apply Tebbe’s theories, not as any sort of fundamental disagreement. For there is much that is great and good in this book, and much to agree with.