English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

I ask in this article what the libertarian principle of full self-ownership has to say about volontary actions directed towards oneself. Through the principle of full self-ownership, libertarians defend the persons’ individual liberty to live as they choose to do, as long as they don’t infringe on the rights of others. Apparently, this principle doesn’t have much to say about what we are morally allowed to do to ourselves or not. Some libertarians, however, like Vallentyne, maintain that, if we have duties or obligations to ourselves, then we cannot be full self-owner. In this perspective, full self-ownership would imply that what we do to ourselves is morally indifferent. I want to show in this article that full self-ownership is compatible with the existence of duties to ourselves. I also want to argue that, if libertarians, and in particular Vallentyne, assert the thesis of the moral indifference of what we do to ourselves, this is not a consequence of the selfownership thesis, but of their own moral subjectivism.. VOLUME 6 NUMÉRO 1 PRINTEMPS/SPRING 2011 PROPRIÉTÉ DE SOI ET INDIFFÉRENCE MORALE DU RAPPORT À SOI NATHALIE MAILLARD ROMAGNOLI UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL 4 Article : 4 13 Notes : 15

Propriété de soi et indifférence morale du rapport à soi