BaierK. (1970) “Obligation: political and moral,” pp. 116–141 in PennockJ. R.ChapmanJ. W. (eds.) Nomos XII-Political and Legal Obligation. New York: Atherton.
2.
BaierK. (1958) The Moral Point of View: A Rational Basis of Ethics. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell Univ. Press.
3.
BayC. (1965) “Politics and pseudopolitics: a critical evaluation of some behavioral literature.”Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev.59: 39–51.
4.
FootP. (1969) “Moral beliefs,” pp. 196–213 in HudsonW. D. (ed.) The Is/Ought Question. New York: St. Martin's.
5.
HannafordR. V. (1972) “You ought to derive ‘ought from is.'”Ethics82: 155–162.
6.
HareR. M. (1969a) “Descriptivism,” pp. 240–258 in HudsonW. D. (ed.) The Is/Ought Question. New York: St. Martin's.
7.
HareR. M. (1969b) “The promising game,” pp. 144–156 in HudsonW. D. (ed.) The Is/Ought Game. New York: St. Martin's.
8.
HudsonW. D. (1970) Modern Moral Philosophy. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday Anchor.
9.
KuhnT. S. (1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolution. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
10.
LaslettP.RuncimanW. G., [eds.] (1967) Philosophy, Politics, and Society, Third Series. New York: Barnes & Noble.
11.
LipsetS. M. (1960) Political Man: The Social Bases of Politics. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday.
12.
MacIntyreA. (1971) Against the Self-Images of the Age. New York: Schocken.
13.
OppenheimF. E. (1971) “Democracy: characteristics included and excluded.”Monist55: 29–500.
14.
OppenheimF. E. (1970) “Egalitarianism as a descriptive concept.”Amer. Philosophical Q.7: 143–150.
15.
OppenheimF. E. (1968a) Moral Principles in Political Philosophy. New York: Random House.
16.
OppenheimF. E. (1968b) “Freedom,” pp. 554–559 in Volume 5 of International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. New York: Macmillan and Free Press.
17.
OppenheimF. E. (1961) Dimensions of Freedom. New York: St. Martin's.
18.
PitkinH. (1966) “Obligation and consent-Il.”Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev.60: 39–52.
19.
ScarpelliV. (1964) “La dimensione normativa della liberta.”Rivista di Filosofia55: 449–467.
20.
SearleJ. R. (1970) Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge Univ. Press.
21.
SearleJ. R. (1969) “How to derive ‘ought’ from ‘is,'” pp. 120–134 in HudsonW. D. (ed.) The Is/Ought Question. New York: St. Martin's.
22.
SurkinM. (1970) “Sense and nonsense in American politics,” in SurkinM.WolfeA. (eds.) An End to Political Science. New York: Basic Books.
23.
TaylorC. (1967) “Neutrality in political science,” pp. 25–57 in LaslettP.RuncimanW. G. (eds.) Philosophy, Politics, and Society. New York: Barnes & Noble.
24.
TaylorP. W. (n.d.) Normative Discourse. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
25.
Von LeydenW. (1963) “On justifying inequality.”Pol. Studies11: 56–70.
26.
WarnockG. (1967) Contemporary Moral PhUosophy. New York: St. Martin's.
27.
ZinnH. (1969) “How democratic is America?” in GoldwinR. A. (ed.) How Democratic Is America?Chicago: Rand McNally.