To send content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about sending content to .
To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure email@example.com
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This chapter provides three regional case studies during 1945–65. Sheffield, selected for being after Hull the least religious city in the nation, shows the relentless power of an alienating evangelical and Nonconformist culture of the middle classes, which bombarded the working classes with middle-class solutions: teetotalism, Sabbatarianism, few pop music venues and contraceptive advice by middle-class volunteers. The result was, according to an influential interpretation by E. R. Wickham, the Anglican industrial missionary, proletarian and artisan alienation from the churches. Glasgow forms a contrast of the most highly religious industrial city in mainland Britain, but with a popular culture under aggressive licensing control, notably its public houses from which ‘civilising’ games, music, television and attractions for women were banned. Sexual culture was made as difficult as possible. Lastly, the Isle of Lewis shows a puritanical anti-alcoholic culture, based on the most orthodox of Calvinist churches, within which, despite overt conformity, there were notable attempts at popular resistance, including organised lawbreaking.
In Chapter 5 I scrutinize the theory of legal obligation put forward by Andrei Marmor. I start out by introducing the basics of Marmor’s legal conventionalism and his view of legal obligation, which I will qualify as a minimalist statement of the reason account. Then, I critically engage with a distinction that I take to be central to Marmor’s study of legal obligation: the distinction between obligations within a practice, or internal obligations, and obligations that are external to it. Marmor claims that legal obligations are obligations of the former type. I will argue that a conception constructing legal obligation as an internal demand cannot account for the characteristically genuine bindingness of the duties arising out of the law. With that done, I will radicalize my critical stance by arguing that, at least on one plausible interpretation, Marmor’s account of legal obligation depicts legal obligation as a perspectivized duty, namely, a demand that is justified exclusively ‘from a certain point of view’. This picture is objectionable, since perspectivized obligations inherently lack genuine binding force.