Far Away Is Close at Hand: A Critique of Martha Nussbaum’s Cosmopolitanism

IF 1.4 4区 社会学 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Society Pub Date : 2024-08-16 DOI:10.1007/s12115-024-01008-1
John Ackroyd
{"title":"Far Away Is Close at Hand: A Critique of Martha Nussbaum’s Cosmopolitanism","authors":"John Ackroyd","doi":"10.1007/s12115-024-01008-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Martha Nussbaum’s approach to ethical and political philosophy — unlike that of certain of her notable contemporaries — is neither ahistorical nor concerned with augmenting or refining the historical record. Rather, its aim is learning what the deepest philosophical minds of the past have proposed as the fairest organisation of society, in terms of a balance between autonomy for individuals and communities, and an equitable distribution of global resources. Whilst she argues fundamentally for cosmopolitanism — hence prioritises the latter — she struggles, in her later work, to accommodate the former within such a global socio-political model. I suggest this is because she presupposes that patriotism is antecedent to, and generative of, a cosmopolitan outlook, when in fact each of these political values is irreducible, and antithetical, to the other. Nussbaum supposes this, I propose, because her work focuses on the conceptual subtleties of intellectual history, which are sadly seldom mirrored in the brutal history of facts.</p>","PeriodicalId":47267,"journal":{"name":"Society","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Society","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12115-024-01008-1","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Martha Nussbaum’s approach to ethical and political philosophy — unlike that of certain of her notable contemporaries — is neither ahistorical nor concerned with augmenting or refining the historical record. Rather, its aim is learning what the deepest philosophical minds of the past have proposed as the fairest organisation of society, in terms of a balance between autonomy for individuals and communities, and an equitable distribution of global resources. Whilst she argues fundamentally for cosmopolitanism — hence prioritises the latter — she struggles, in her later work, to accommodate the former within such a global socio-political model. I suggest this is because she presupposes that patriotism is antecedent to, and generative of, a cosmopolitan outlook, when in fact each of these political values is irreducible, and antithetical, to the other. Nussbaum supposes this, I propose, because her work focuses on the conceptual subtleties of intellectual history, which are sadly seldom mirrored in the brutal history of facts.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
远在天边,近在眼前:玛莎-努斯鲍姆的世界主义批判
玛莎-努斯鲍姆(Martha Nussbaum)研究伦理和政治哲学的方法--与她同时代的某些著名哲学家不同--既不是非历史的,也不关注对历史记录的补充或完善。相反,她的目标是学习过去最深邃的哲学思想提出的最公平的社会组织形式,即在个人和社区的自主性与全球资源的公平分配之间取得平衡。虽然她从根本上主张世界主义--因此优先考虑后者--但在她后来的著作中,她却努力将前者纳入这种全球社会政治模式。我认为,这是因为她预先假定爱国主义是世界主义前景的先决条件和生成因素,而事实上,这两种政治价值观中的每一种都是不可还原的,而且是相互对立的。我认为,努斯鲍姆之所以这样假设,是因为她的研究侧重于思想史中的微妙概念,而这些微妙概念在残酷的事实史中却很少得到反映,令人遗憾。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Society
Society Multiple-
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
11.10%
发文量
132
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Founded in 1962, Society enjoys a wide reputation as a journal that publishes the latest scholarship on the central questions of contemporary society. It produces six issues a year offering new ideas and quality research in the social sciences and humanities in a clear, accessible style. Society sees itself as occupying the vital center in intellectual and political debate. Put negatively, this means the journal is opposed to all forms of dogmatism, absolutism, ideological uniformity, and facile relativism. More positively, it seeks to champion genuine diversity of opinion and a recognition of the complexity of the world''s issues. Society includes full-length research articles, commentaries, discussion pieces, and book reviews which critically examine work conducted in the social sciences as well as the humanities. The journal is of interest to scholars and researchers who work in these broadly-based fields of enquiry and those who conduct research in neighboring intellectual domains. Society is also of interest to non-specialists who are keen to understand the latest developments in such subjects as sociology, history, political science, social anthropology, philosophy, economics, and psychology. The journal’s interdisciplinary approach is reflected in the variety of esteemed thinkers who have contributed to Society since its inception. Contributors have included Simone de Beauvoir, Robert K Merton, James Q. Wilson, Margaret Mead, Abraham Maslow, Richard Hoggart, William Julius Wilson, Arlie Hochschild, Alvin Gouldner, Orlando Patterson, Katherine S. Newman, Patrick Moynihan, Claude Levi-Strauss, Hans Morgenthau, David Riesman, Amitai Etzioni and many other eminent thought leaders. The success of the journal rests on attracting authors who combine originality of thought and lucidity of expression. In that spirit, Society is keen to publish both established and new authors who have something significant to say about the important issues of our time.
期刊最新文献
On Aging Adaptation and Survival Among the University of Nigeria Nsukka Academic Staff: The Double Tragedy of “No Salary” and “Lockdown” Policies Not “Coddling” but “Rewiring”: Explaining Psychic Harm Girls in Pieces: An Exploration of Ethnic Identity in Two Anglo-Latina University Students Depression Among India’s Older Adults: The Burdens and Challenges of a Widespread Disease
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1