Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Moral Philosophy and Politics

Editor-in-Chief: Schefczyk, Michael

Managing Editor: Schmidt-Petri, Christoph

Ed. by Meyer, Lukas Heinrich / Peacock, Mark / Schaber, Peter


CiteScore 2018: 0.41

Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.565

Online
ISSN
2194-5624
See all formats and pricing
More options …

Brain Drain, Contracts, and Moral Obligation

Daniel Edward Callies
  • Corresponding author
  • Cluster of Excellence “Normative Orders”, Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität Frankfurt, Theodor-W.-Adorno-Platz 1, 60323 Frankfurt am Main, Hessen 60323, Germany
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2016-03-08 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/mopp-2015-0023

Abstract

In this paper I first argue that when answering the question of whether or not governments may restrict emigration, Brock and Blake are staking out positions not astronomically far from one another. Despite the ostensibly large philosophical gap between the two, both think that certain governments may restrict emigration when such restriction is agreed to in a morally binding contract. Secondly, both authors think that there are specific “circumstances” or “conditions” under which a contract that restricts emigration can be morally binding. This second part of the paper will pose some questions that explore these various circumstances or conditions. The ultimate aim of the paper is to help point the debate in the right direction so as to further develop an answer to the question of whether or not governments may restrict emigration.

Keywords: contracts; moral obligation; legitimacy; emigration

References

  • Brock, G., and Blake, M. (2015). Debating Brain Drain: May Governments Restrict Emigration? (Oxford ; New York: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar

  • Buchanan, A. (2003). Justice, Legitimacy, and Self-Determination (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar

  • Doyle, M. W. (2006). “One World, Many Peoples: International Justice in John Rawls’s the Law of Peoples.” Perspectives on Politics 4(1): 109–120.Google Scholar

  • Eyal, N. (2012). “Informed Consent”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2012), http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2012/entries/informed-consent/ (accessed on 12th August, 2015).

  • New Jersey Supreme Court. (1988). “Matter of Baby M,” http://law.justia.com/cases/new-jersey/supreme-court/1988/109-n-j-396-1.html (accessed on 12th August, 2015)

  • Rawls, J. (1999). A Theory of Justice (Rev. ed). (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press).Google Scholar

  • Rawls, J. (2005). Political Liberalism (Expanded ed). (New York: Columbia University Press).Google Scholar

  • Simmons, A. J. (1979). Moral Principles and Political Obligations (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar

  • Scharpf, Fritz. (1999). Governing in Europe: Effective and Democratic? (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2016-03-08

Published in Print: 2016-04-01


Funding Source: DFG funded Cluster of Excellence “Normative Orders” at Goethe University Frankfurt am Main

Award identifier / Grant number: Goethe University Frankfurt am Main

This publication was supported by the DFG funded Cluster of Excellence “Normative Orders” at Goethe University Frankfurt am Main.


Citation Information: Moral Philosophy and Politics, Volume 3, Issue 1, Pages 83–93, ISSN (Online) 2194-5624, ISSN (Print) 2194-5616, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/mopp-2015-0023.

Export Citation

©2016 by De Gruyter.Get Permission

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in