Pub Date : 2021-07-08DOI: 10.1080/17449626.2021.1946126
Juliette Schwak
ABSTRACT This article analyses a recent discourse of responsibility that accompanies states’ foreign aid provision. States adopt this discourse of National Social Responsibility (NSR) to show their compliance with globally accepted ethical standards by providing aid. This ethical behavior is underpinned by a political-economic logic, which derives from the promotional literature exhorting states to maintain national competitiveness by mimicking firms’ behaviors. While discourses of aid responsibility are not new, in the NSR discourse, the state communicates its ethical compliance with aid norms to promote economic competitiveness. This discourse is not a benign rhetorical device; it reproduces development inequalities and leads to the marketization of development policies. The article’s theoretical arguments are then used to analyze South Korea’s communication of its foreign aid. The case of South Korea exemplifies the patterns and tensions highlighted in the discussion of the NSR discourse.
{"title":"Foreign aid and discourses of National Social Responsibility: evidence from South Korea","authors":"Juliette Schwak","doi":"10.1080/17449626.2021.1946126","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449626.2021.1946126","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article analyses a recent discourse of responsibility that accompanies states’ foreign aid provision. States adopt this discourse of National Social Responsibility (NSR) to show their compliance with globally accepted ethical standards by providing aid. This ethical behavior is underpinned by a political-economic logic, which derives from the promotional literature exhorting states to maintain national competitiveness by mimicking firms’ behaviors. While discourses of aid responsibility are not new, in the NSR discourse, the state communicates its ethical compliance with aid norms to promote economic competitiveness. This discourse is not a benign rhetorical device; it reproduces development inequalities and leads to the marketization of development policies. The article’s theoretical arguments are then used to analyze South Korea’s communication of its foreign aid. The case of South Korea exemplifies the patterns and tensions highlighted in the discussion of the NSR discourse.","PeriodicalId":35191,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Global Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17449626.2021.1946126","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47738824","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-07DOI: 10.1080/17449626.2021.1949377
J. Sønderholm, J. Mainz
ABSTRACT In the literature on global justice, there has been a lengthy debate about what the world’s rich owe to the world’s poor. Some have argued that rich individuals have positive duties of beneficence to help the poor, while others have argued that rich individuals only have negative duties not to harm them. A common objection to the former view is that once it is accepted that positive duties exist, fulfilling these duties will be overdemanding since rich individuals can almost always help a little more. Some have tried to overcome this overdemandingness objection by setting cut-off points for how demanding morality is. In this article, we aim to show that it is problematic to be committed to the following propositions: (1) Positive duties to aid exist; (2) The overdemandingness objection is a serious challenge for anyone who accepts that positive duties to aid exist; and (3) Setting cut-off points for how demanding morality is constitutes a plausible way to overcome the overdemandingness objection. Showing that a commitment to (1), (2) and (3) is problematic is of interest given that several influential theorists are committed to this set of views. This set of views is simply a bad theoretical cocktail.
{"title":"Why some defenders of positive duties serve a bad theoretical cocktail","authors":"J. Sønderholm, J. Mainz","doi":"10.1080/17449626.2021.1949377","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449626.2021.1949377","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In the literature on global justice, there has been a lengthy debate about what the world’s rich owe to the world’s poor. Some have argued that rich individuals have positive duties of beneficence to help the poor, while others have argued that rich individuals only have negative duties not to harm them. A common objection to the former view is that once it is accepted that positive duties exist, fulfilling these duties will be overdemanding since rich individuals can almost always help a little more. Some have tried to overcome this overdemandingness objection by setting cut-off points for how demanding morality is. In this article, we aim to show that it is problematic to be committed to the following propositions: (1) Positive duties to aid exist; (2) The overdemandingness objection is a serious challenge for anyone who accepts that positive duties to aid exist; and (3) Setting cut-off points for how demanding morality is constitutes a plausible way to overcome the overdemandingness objection. Showing that a commitment to (1), (2) and (3) is problematic is of interest given that several influential theorists are committed to this set of views. This set of views is simply a bad theoretical cocktail.","PeriodicalId":35191,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Global Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17449626.2021.1949377","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47934435","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-06-16DOI: 10.1080/17449626.2021.1933137
M. Aßländer
ABSTRACT In the political context, the tenet of subsidiarity states that societal tasks should be solved by subordinate entities in society if these entities have the competencies to solve such problems without governmental assistance. Transferred to the business context the tenet of subsidiarity describes the assignment of co-responsibilities to corporate actors in the process of corporate-governmental task sharing. However, in a recently published article Tempels, Blok, and Verweij [2017. “Understanding Political Responsibility in Corporate Citizenship: Towards a Shared Responsibility for the Common Good.” Journal of Global Ethics 13 (1): 90–108. doi: 10.1080/17449626.2017.1320577.] doubt that subsidiarity might function as a governance principle for the corporate-governmental task-sharing especially in the context of wicked problems and in cases of failing nation-states. Wicked problems are typical in the social context since solving societal problems often requires efforts from various actors and does not allow for assigning responsibilities to clearly defined authorities, especially in cases where nation-states as guarantor of the political order fail to provide adequate political conditions for the subsidiary task-sharing in society. However, as we will outline in our contribution, a deeper analysis of the tenet of subsidiarity reveals that subsidiarity, at least partially, may function as a structuring principle for societal task-sharing even in the context of wicked problems and in the absence of a well-ordered nation-state since it allows for decentralized task-related decision-making.
在政治背景下，辅助性原则指出，社会任务应该由社会中的下属实体来解决，如果这些实体有能力在没有政府援助的情况下解决这些问题。从属原则转移到商业环境中，描述了在公司-政府任务分担过程中对公司行为者的共同责任分配。然而，在最近发表的一篇文章temels, Blok, and Verweij [2017.]“理解企业公民的政治责任:为共同利益承担共同责任”。全球伦理学报，13(1):90-108。doi: 10.1080 / 17449626.2017.1320577。我怀疑辅助性是否可以作为公司-政府任务分担的治理原则，特别是在棘手问题和民族国家失败的情况下。邪恶问题在社会背景下是典型的，因为解决社会问题往往需要各种行动者的努力，并且不允许将责任分配给明确界定的当局，特别是在民族国家作为政治秩序的保证人未能为社会中的附属任务分担提供足够的政治条件的情况下。然而，正如我们将在我们的贡献中概述的那样，对辅助性原则的更深入分析表明，即使在邪恶问题的背景下和缺乏秩序良好的民族国家的情况下，辅助性(至少部分地)也可以作为社会任务共享的结构原则，因为它允许分散的任务相关决策。
{"title":"Subsidiarity, wicked problems and the matter of failing states","authors":"M. Aßländer","doi":"10.1080/17449626.2021.1933137","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449626.2021.1933137","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In the political context, the tenet of subsidiarity states that societal tasks should be solved by subordinate entities in society if these entities have the competencies to solve such problems without governmental assistance. Transferred to the business context the tenet of subsidiarity describes the assignment of co-responsibilities to corporate actors in the process of corporate-governmental task sharing. However, in a recently published article Tempels, Blok, and Verweij [2017. “Understanding Political Responsibility in Corporate Citizenship: Towards a Shared Responsibility for the Common Good.” Journal of Global Ethics 13 (1): 90–108. doi: 10.1080/17449626.2017.1320577.] doubt that subsidiarity might function as a governance principle for the corporate-governmental task-sharing especially in the context of wicked problems and in cases of failing nation-states. Wicked problems are typical in the social context since solving societal problems often requires efforts from various actors and does not allow for assigning responsibilities to clearly defined authorities, especially in cases where nation-states as guarantor of the political order fail to provide adequate political conditions for the subsidiary task-sharing in society. However, as we will outline in our contribution, a deeper analysis of the tenet of subsidiarity reveals that subsidiarity, at least partially, may function as a structuring principle for societal task-sharing even in the context of wicked problems and in the absence of a well-ordered nation-state since it allows for decentralized task-related decision-making.","PeriodicalId":35191,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Global Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17449626.2021.1933137","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44563134","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.1080/17449626.2021.1973065
Jorge Arturo Chaves-Ortiz, Jonathan Cordero-Bonilla, María Leonela Artavia-Jiménez, Marcelo Valverde-Morales
ABSTRACT This article discusses L.-J. Lebret’s methodological and epistemological approach for the elaboration of the concepts of ‘human economy’ and ‘harmonized human development’. Both concepts were very important for Lebretian theory and practice, in the decades of the forties through sixties of the last century, because they redirected economics towards placing the human person at the center of the economy. Significant as they were, the concepts were understandably conditioned by the political and cultural traits of the time, as was Father Lebret himself. This leads us to put our main emphasis on Lebret’s method and his epistemological perspective, in order to show the continuing relevance of his contribution to the scientific analysis of society, as opposed to contributions to very concrete and particular issues. Lebret’s continuous insistence on knowledge of the real conditions of life of the population in a territory sets the starting point for his method of analysis and transformative action. The approach lies far distanced from attempts that privilege abstract models over real-life economics to understand socioeconomic problems.
{"title":"Lebret’s method and epistemological perspective for ‘human economy’ and ‘harmonized human development’","authors":"Jorge Arturo Chaves-Ortiz, Jonathan Cordero-Bonilla, María Leonela Artavia-Jiménez, Marcelo Valverde-Morales","doi":"10.1080/17449626.2021.1973065","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449626.2021.1973065","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT\u0000 This article discusses L.-J. Lebret’s methodological and epistemological approach for the elaboration of the concepts of ‘human economy’ and ‘harmonized human development’. Both concepts were very important for Lebretian theory and practice, in the decades of the forties through sixties of the last century, because they redirected economics towards placing the human person at the center of the economy. Significant as they were, the concepts were understandably conditioned by the political and cultural traits of the time, as was Father Lebret himself. This leads us to put our main emphasis on Lebret’s method and his epistemological perspective, in order to show the continuing relevance of his contribution to the scientific analysis of society, as opposed to contributions to very concrete and particular issues. Lebret’s continuous insistence on knowledge of the real conditions of life of the population in a territory sets the starting point for his method of analysis and transformative action. The approach lies far distanced from attempts that privilege abstract models over real-life economics to understand socioeconomic problems.","PeriodicalId":35191,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Global Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49321962","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.1080/17449626.2021.1954053
Montserrat Culebro Juárez, D. Gasper
ABSTRACT This paper discusses the respective contributions to development ethics made by Louis-Joseph Lebret (1897–1966) and his pupil and successor Denis Goulet (1931–2006). Sections 2 and 3 present steps in the emergence of a field of development ethics, and introduce the work of Lebret and Goulet, noting similarities and contrasts. Sections 4 and 5 clarify different senses and forms of ‘development ethics’, to then discuss who might be called ‘father of development ethics’. Lebret had devised a field of human economics and in the 1950s called for an ethics of development, which he began to sketch. His work made significant advances, especially if development ethics is seen as an interdisciplinary policy-oriented field rather than as a subdiscipline in philosophical ethics. In the 1960s, Goulet went on to outline development ethics as a philosophical subdiscipline and to articulate various themes. In his later work though, while always speaking of a ‘discipline’ of development ethics but mostly meaning disciplined investigation, Goulet largely pursued, as had Lebret, a path toward a policy-oriented field of ‘practical ethics’, not a (sub)disciplinary path in a conventional academic sense.
{"title":"Comparing two pioneers of development ethics: Louis-Joseph Lebret and Denis Goulet","authors":"Montserrat Culebro Juárez, D. Gasper","doi":"10.1080/17449626.2021.1954053","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449626.2021.1954053","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper discusses the respective contributions to development ethics made by Louis-Joseph Lebret (1897–1966) and his pupil and successor Denis Goulet (1931–2006). Sections 2 and 3 present steps in the emergence of a field of development ethics, and introduce the work of Lebret and Goulet, noting similarities and contrasts. Sections 4 and 5 clarify different senses and forms of ‘development ethics’, to then discuss who might be called ‘father of development ethics’. Lebret had devised a field of human economics and in the 1950s called for an ethics of development, which he began to sketch. His work made significant advances, especially if development ethics is seen as an interdisciplinary policy-oriented field rather than as a subdiscipline in philosophical ethics. In the 1960s, Goulet went on to outline development ethics as a philosophical subdiscipline and to articulate various themes. In his later work though, while always speaking of a ‘discipline’ of development ethics but mostly meaning disciplined investigation, Goulet largely pursued, as had Lebret, a path toward a policy-oriented field of ‘practical ethics’, not a (sub)disciplinary path in a conventional academic sense.","PeriodicalId":35191,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Global Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47560751","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.1080/17449626.2021.1954050
J. Ballet, J. Dubois, Alice Kouadio
ABSTRACT The Abidjan School is a school of thought that developed in the 1980s and 1990s in the Côte d'Ivoire inspired by the work of Louis-Joseph Lebret and Amartya Sen. It follows the empirical approach initiated by Lebret, aimed at better understanding people’s living conditions in order to ethically influence public policies. The Abidjan School has aimed to renew this tradition of empirical analyses of living conditions and better address the ethics of development. A key feature is the combination of economic and anthropological approaches. The School contributed to the redesign of household survey questionnaires, into formats now used in several African countries. It is also part of the renewal of analyses of the person, going beyond Lebret’s personalism.
{"title":"The Abidjan School and Louis-Joseph Lebret: marrying empirical research and development ethics","authors":"J. Ballet, J. Dubois, Alice Kouadio","doi":"10.1080/17449626.2021.1954050","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449626.2021.1954050","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The Abidjan School is a school of thought that developed in the 1980s and 1990s in the Côte d'Ivoire inspired by the work of Louis-Joseph Lebret and Amartya Sen. It follows the empirical approach initiated by Lebret, aimed at better understanding people’s living conditions in order to ethically influence public policies. The Abidjan School has aimed to renew this tradition of empirical analyses of living conditions and better address the ethics of development. A key feature is the combination of economic and anthropological approaches. The School contributed to the redesign of household survey questionnaires, into formats now used in several African countries. It is also part of the renewal of analyses of the person, going beyond Lebret’s personalism.","PeriodicalId":35191,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Global Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47243767","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.1080/17449626.2021.1973539
D. Gasper, Lori Keleher
Louis-Joseph Lebret (1897–1966) was a progenitor and co-founder of ‘development ethics’ as a self-declared field of research, public conversation and activism. He comprehensively articulated the fundamental notion that development should be conceived in terms of human values and that it differs from economic growth. Although the notion that development is notmerely economic growth had been sketched earlier by, for example,Marx or J.S. Mill (see, e.g. Lebret 1961, 447), Lebret went considerably further. He was explicit, for example, that American levels of income were neither feasible nor desirable globally and that ‘One can live humanly with much less’ (1957, 91). He warned that the term ‘development’ was being used in a grossly confused fashion: it was equated to economic growth, which was being treated as magical and that supposedly should never end. To counteract this, decades before the Human Development Reports, Lebret reviewed living conditions globally, for example, grouping the world into ten zones and describing them using radar diagrams to show a wide range of value-guided ‘output’ indicators such as undernourishment, sickness, illiteracy and (in his list) per capita income; plus what he considered negative indicators, like suicide and atheism. He reviewed also ‘input’ indicators like agricultural and financial organization, physical infrastructure, levels of industrialization, levels of training, etc. (Lebret 1958, 1961). He was guided by a theory of being human that provided criteria for ‘development’ and that allowed him to speak of ‘développement authentique’ (1961, 75), improved human well-being (‘mieux-être humain’) and being more (‘plus-être humain’), as well as of being less. Lebret was the first Christian theorist to give priority to problems of economic development, argued his biographer Lydie Garreau (1997, 423). Hewasmotivated by the neglect of the life realities and suffering of themajority of humanity in the hegemonic economics and politics of his time. This ledhimbeyondconcerns for charity and ‘social’palliatives addedon to an unchanged economic system, as were common in Catholic social practice, to a stress on radically new national and global social compacts for human solidarity (e.g. Lebret 1959). His work evolved from study and activism in the fisheries sector, first in Brittany and thenmore widely around France and Europe in the 1930s; to regional, urban and community development planning in France and then in several Latin American countries, in the 1940s and 50s; to worldwide challenges of socio-economic development, from the
Louis Joseph Lebret（1897–1966）是“发展伦理学”的创始人和联合创始人，该领域自称为研究、公共对话和行动主义领域。他全面阐述了一个基本概念，即发展应该从人类价值观的角度来看待，发展不同于经济增长。尽管发展不仅仅是经济增长的概念在早些时候已经被马克思或J.S.密尔（见，例如Lebret 1961447）所概括，但Lebret走得更远。例如，他明确表示，美国的收入水平在全球范围内既不可行，也不可取，“一个人可以用更少的钱过人类的生活”（1957，91）。他警告说，“发展”一词的使用方式非常混乱：它被等同于经济增长，而经济增长被视为神奇的，应该永远不会结束。为了应对这种情况，在《人类发展报告》发表几十年前，Lebret审查了全球的生活条件，例如，将世界分为十个区域，并使用雷达图对其进行描述，以显示各种以价值为导向的“产出”指标，如营养不良、疾病、文盲和（在他的列表中）人均收入；再加上他认为的负面指标，比如自杀和无神论。他还审查了农业和金融组织、有形基础设施、工业化水平、培训水平等“投入”指标（Lebret 19581961）。他受到一种人的理论的指导，这种理论为“发展”提供了标准，并使他能够谈论“真正的发展”（1961年，75年）、改善人类福祉（“人类幸福”）、变得更多（“人类美好”）以及变得更少。勒布雷特的传记作家莱迪·加罗（Lydie Garreau，1997423）认为，勒布雷特是第一位重视经济发展问题的基督教理论家。在他那个时代的霸权主义经济和政治中，他被忽视了人类的生活现实和大多数人的苦难所感动。这导致了对慈善和“社会”缓解措施的关注，加上天主教社会实践中常见的不变的经济体系，以及对人类团结的全新国家和全球社会契约的强调（例如Lebret 1959）。他的工作源于渔业部门的研究和行动主义，先是在布列塔尼，然后在20世纪30年代在法国和欧洲更广泛地开展；法国和几个拉丁美洲国家在20世纪40年代和50年代的区域、城市和社区发展规划；从
{"title":"Investigating L.-J. Lebret as a pioneer of human development thinking and global development ethics","authors":"D. Gasper, Lori Keleher","doi":"10.1080/17449626.2021.1973539","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449626.2021.1973539","url":null,"abstract":"Louis-Joseph Lebret (1897–1966) was a progenitor and co-founder of ‘development ethics’ as a self-declared field of research, public conversation and activism. He comprehensively articulated the fundamental notion that development should be conceived in terms of human values and that it differs from economic growth. Although the notion that development is notmerely economic growth had been sketched earlier by, for example,Marx or J.S. Mill (see, e.g. Lebret 1961, 447), Lebret went considerably further. He was explicit, for example, that American levels of income were neither feasible nor desirable globally and that ‘One can live humanly with much less’ (1957, 91). He warned that the term ‘development’ was being used in a grossly confused fashion: it was equated to economic growth, which was being treated as magical and that supposedly should never end. To counteract this, decades before the Human Development Reports, Lebret reviewed living conditions globally, for example, grouping the world into ten zones and describing them using radar diagrams to show a wide range of value-guided ‘output’ indicators such as undernourishment, sickness, illiteracy and (in his list) per capita income; plus what he considered negative indicators, like suicide and atheism. He reviewed also ‘input’ indicators like agricultural and financial organization, physical infrastructure, levels of industrialization, levels of training, etc. (Lebret 1958, 1961). He was guided by a theory of being human that provided criteria for ‘development’ and that allowed him to speak of ‘développement authentique’ (1961, 75), improved human well-being (‘mieux-être humain’) and being more (‘plus-être humain’), as well as of being less. Lebret was the first Christian theorist to give priority to problems of economic development, argued his biographer Lydie Garreau (1997, 423). Hewasmotivated by the neglect of the life realities and suffering of themajority of humanity in the hegemonic economics and politics of his time. This ledhimbeyondconcerns for charity and ‘social’palliatives addedon to an unchanged economic system, as were common in Catholic social practice, to a stress on radically new national and global social compacts for human solidarity (e.g. Lebret 1959). His work evolved from study and activism in the fisheries sector, first in Brittany and thenmore widely around France and Europe in the 1930s; to regional, urban and community development planning in France and then in several Latin American countries, in the 1940s and 50s; to worldwide challenges of socio-economic development, from the","PeriodicalId":35191,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Global Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48785430","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.1080/17449626.2021.1954051
D. Gasper
ABSTRACT Three themes in the work of Louis-Joseph Lebret (1897–1966) have especial relevance for current development ethics: first, the importance of counterbalancing a disciplinary philosophical or theological orientation with strong bases in empirical life-experience, practical learning and social sciences; second, the necessity to study capitalism not only ‘development’, and concrete life-needs not only a generalised notion of ‘freedom’; and third, the imperative to employ global and cosmopolitan frames besides national and ‘community’ ones. These themes came to distinguish Lebret as a development ethicist. He began with the first and second from the 1930s, under his banner of ‘Économie et Humanisme’. The third emerged later in consequence of his studies across an interconnected world. The paper elucidates and discusses the three themes in turn. The subsequent sections then briefly consider Lebret’s legacies, influence and continuing relevance: directly, within the Catholic Church’s perspectives since the 1960s on human and global development; and indirectly, for secular work on ‘human development’ and in Anglophone development ethics.
路易斯-约瑟夫·勒布雷特(Louis-Joseph Lebret, 1897-1966)著作中的三个主题与当前的发展伦理学特别相关:第一，以经验生活经验、实践学习和社会科学为坚实基础，平衡学科哲学或神学取向的重要性;第二，研究资本主义的必要性不仅仅是“发展”，而是具体的生活——需要的不仅仅是一个笼统的“自由”概念;第三，除了国家和“社区”框架之外，还必须采用全球和世界主义框架。这些主题使Lebret成为一名发展伦理学家。在他的“Économie et Humanisme”的旗帜下，他从20世纪30年代的第一和第二本书开始。后来，他在一个相互关联的世界中进行研究，从而形成了第三种理论。本文依次对这三个主题进行了阐述和讨论。随后的章节简要地考虑了Lebret的遗产、影响和持续的相关性:直接地，在天主教会自20世纪60年代以来对人类和全球发展的看法;间接地，为“人类发展”和英语国家发展伦理的世俗工作。
{"title":"L.-J. Lebret: a human development ethics grounded in empirical social research and a global perspective","authors":"D. Gasper","doi":"10.1080/17449626.2021.1954051","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449626.2021.1954051","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT\u0000 Three themes in the work of Louis-Joseph Lebret (1897–1966) have especial relevance for current development ethics: first, the importance of counterbalancing a disciplinary philosophical or theological orientation with strong bases in empirical life-experience, practical learning and social sciences; second, the necessity to study capitalism not only ‘development’, and concrete life-needs not only a generalised notion of ‘freedom’; and third, the imperative to employ global and cosmopolitan frames besides national and ‘community’ ones. These themes came to distinguish Lebret as a development ethicist. He began with the first and second from the 1930s, under his banner of ‘Économie et Humanisme’. The third emerged later in consequence of his studies across an interconnected world. The paper elucidates and discusses the three themes in turn. The subsequent sections then briefly consider Lebret’s legacies, influence and continuing relevance: directly, within the Catholic Church’s perspectives since the 1960s on human and global development; and indirectly, for secular work on ‘human development’ and in Anglophone development ethics.","PeriodicalId":35191,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Global Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47143787","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.1080/17449626.2021.1958903
M. Regan
ABSTRACT The concept of modernity is fraught with contestation, a wedge that divides people, practices, institutions, and beliefs. This chasm is particularly pronounced for traditional institutions like the Catholic Church that must contend with one of two dissatisfying options: wholesale acceptance of modernism, which can lead to charges of revisionism and infidelity to tradition, or stalwart rejection of modernism, which can lead to accusations of rigidity and irrelevance. There is, however, a third possibility, a hybrid approach that respects and values the teachings of tradition while taking seriously the special problems and insights of the modern condition. This approach is taken by The Pastoral Constitution of the Church in the Modern World (also known as Gaudium et Spes), the final document of the Second Vatical Council (1962–1965). This realization, however, did not emerge from detached reflection or theological debate, but rather, through the work of pioneer Catholic social thinkers and activists like the French Dominican Louis-Joseph Lebret (1897–1966). This article examples how Lebret's analysis of modernity and its problems evolved during his life and work, and how these insights ultimately helped shape the moral anthropology that enlivens the approach of Gaudium et Spes.
{"title":"Treading between joy and grief: Gaudium et Spes, Louis-Joseph Lebret, and the challenge of modernity","authors":"M. Regan","doi":"10.1080/17449626.2021.1958903","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449626.2021.1958903","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The concept of modernity is fraught with contestation, a wedge that divides people, practices, institutions, and beliefs. This chasm is particularly pronounced for traditional institutions like the Catholic Church that must contend with one of two dissatisfying options: wholesale acceptance of modernism, which can lead to charges of revisionism and infidelity to tradition, or stalwart rejection of modernism, which can lead to accusations of rigidity and irrelevance. There is, however, a third possibility, a hybrid approach that respects and values the teachings of tradition while taking seriously the special problems and insights of the modern condition. This approach is taken by The Pastoral Constitution of the Church in the Modern World (also known as Gaudium et Spes), the final document of the Second Vatical Council (1962–1965). This realization, however, did not emerge from detached reflection or theological debate, but rather, through the work of pioneer Catholic social thinkers and activists like the French Dominican Louis-Joseph Lebret (1897–1966). This article examples how Lebret's analysis of modernity and its problems evolved during his life and work, and how these insights ultimately helped shape the moral anthropology that enlivens the approach of Gaudium et Spes.","PeriodicalId":35191,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Global Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42691821","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.1080/17449626.2021.1957982
A. Villas Boas, A. Folloni
ABSTRACT This article presents how the Dominican friar Louis-Joseph Lebret had influence in Brazilian social thought and development policies throughout the country, influencing even a pro-democracy constitutionalist movement in the 1980s. His spirituality of the common good influenced the Brazilian Catholic Action movement, the emergence of various other social movements and the basic ecclesial communities (CEBs). Further, by offering new analytical tools and forming research groups focused on social impact and social development Lebret influenced an emerging social thinking that produced empirical research for human development on various subjects. This was through his Economy and Humanism movement that Lebret brought to Brazil in the 1940s and through the creation of SAGMACS (Association for Graphic and Mechanic-Graphic Analysis Applied to Social Complexes). The combination of technical and empirical knowledge about human development with a mystique of the common good linked to the Catholic Action movement was inspiring for the Catholic intellectuals who joined Lebret's group and later became important political figures in Brazil. Lebret brought an original perspective that influenced the very notion of what development is, based on the understanding of economy as an instrument for human development, which was to some extent incorporated in the current Brazilian Constitution.
{"title":"The ‘common good’ spirituality of Louis-Joseph Lebret and his influence in the Constitution and development thinking in Brazil","authors":"A. Villas Boas, A. Folloni","doi":"10.1080/17449626.2021.1957982","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449626.2021.1957982","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article presents how the Dominican friar Louis-Joseph Lebret had influence in Brazilian social thought and development policies throughout the country, influencing even a pro-democracy constitutionalist movement in the 1980s. His spirituality of the common good influenced the Brazilian Catholic Action movement, the emergence of various other social movements and the basic ecclesial communities (CEBs). Further, by offering new analytical tools and forming research groups focused on social impact and social development Lebret influenced an emerging social thinking that produced empirical research for human development on various subjects. This was through his Economy and Humanism movement that Lebret brought to Brazil in the 1940s and through the creation of SAGMACS (Association for Graphic and Mechanic-Graphic Analysis Applied to Social Complexes). The combination of technical and empirical knowledge about human development with a mystique of the common good linked to the Catholic Action movement was inspiring for the Catholic intellectuals who joined Lebret's group and later became important political figures in Brazil. Lebret brought an original perspective that influenced the very notion of what development is, based on the understanding of economy as an instrument for human development, which was to some extent incorporated in the current Brazilian Constitution.","PeriodicalId":35191,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Global Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45816515","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：