Distributive justice, social cooperation, and the basis of equality

IF 0.3 3区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY Theoria-A Swedish Journal of Philosophy Pub Date : 2022-09-27 DOI:10.1111/theo.12433
Emil Andersson
{"title":"Distributive justice, social cooperation, and the basis of equality","authors":"Emil Andersson","doi":"10.1111/theo.12433","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper considers the view that the basis of equality is the range property of being a moral person. This view, suggested by John Rawls in his A Theory of Justice (1971), is commonly dismissed in the literature. By defending the view against the criticism levelled against it, I aim to show that this dismissal has been too quick. The critics have generally failed to fully appreciate the fact that Rawls ’ s account is restricted to the domain of distributive justice. On Rawls ’ s view distributive justice is a matter of the fair terms of cooperation among the participants of a system of social cooperation. I argue that this understanding of distributive justice can provide a compelling rationale for considering moral personality as the basis of equality for this domain of morality. That moral persons are indeed equal is further supported by an intuitive argument concerning the irrelevance of morally arbitrary factors, giving us reasons to believe that varying capacities among moral persons does not result in an unequal moral status. The dismissal of Rawls ’ s account of equality has thus been pre-mature, and it remains an important view to consider.","PeriodicalId":43859,"journal":{"name":"Theoria-A Swedish Journal of Philosophy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theoria-A Swedish Journal of Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/theo.12433","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper considers the view that the basis of equality is the range property of being a moral person. This view, suggested by John Rawls in his A Theory of Justice (1971), is commonly dismissed in the literature. By defending the view against the criticism levelled against it, I aim to show that this dismissal has been too quick. The critics have generally failed to fully appreciate the fact that Rawls ’ s account is restricted to the domain of distributive justice. On Rawls ’ s view distributive justice is a matter of the fair terms of cooperation among the participants of a system of social cooperation. I argue that this understanding of distributive justice can provide a compelling rationale for considering moral personality as the basis of equality for this domain of morality. That moral persons are indeed equal is further supported by an intuitive argument concerning the irrelevance of morally arbitrary factors, giving us reasons to believe that varying capacities among moral persons does not result in an unequal moral status. The dismissal of Rawls ’ s account of equality has thus been pre-mature, and it remains an important view to consider.
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
分配正义,社会合作,以及平等的基础
本文认为,平等的基础是道德人的范围属性。这一观点是由约翰·罗尔斯在他的《正义论》(1971)中提出的,在文献中通常被忽视。通过反驳针对这一观点的批评,我的目的是表明,这种摒弃过于草率。批评家们普遍未能充分认识到罗尔斯的解释仅限于分配正义的领域。根据罗尔斯的观点,分配正义是社会合作体系参与者之间合作的公平条件问题。我认为,这种对分配正义的理解可以为将道德人格视为这一道德领域平等的基础提供令人信服的理由。有道德的人确实是平等的,这进一步得到了一个关于道德任意因素无关性的直观论点的支持,这让我们有理由相信,有道德的人之间能力的不同不会导致道德地位的不平等。因此,对罗尔斯关于平等的论述的否定是早熟的,这仍然是一个值得考虑的重要观点。
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
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
65
期刊介绍: Since its foundation in 1935, Theoria publishes research in all areas of philosophy. Theoria is committed to precision and clarity in philosophical discussions, and encourages cooperation between philosophy and other disciplines. The journal is not affiliated with any particular school or faction. Instead, it promotes dialogues between different philosophical viewpoints. Theoria is peer-reviewed. It publishes articles, reviews, and shorter notes and discussions. Short discussion notes on recent articles in Theoria are welcome.
期刊最新文献
Emotional actions: A new approach An embodied theorisation: Arend Heyting's hypothesis about how the self separates from the outer world finds confirmation Unruh's hybrid account of harm Should we be politically correct? Dennett’s prime‐mammal objection to the consequence argument
×
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