Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.1080/17449626.2021.1954052
N. Martins, Vítor Teixeira
ABSTRACT In this article, we describe how Louis-Joseph Lebret’s work, propelled by his human-centred spirituality, contributed to the development of an approach aimed at the transformation of social and economic structures, so as to achieve integral human development. We discuss too the connections between Lebret’s legacy and the advancement of Integral Human Development within the Catholic Church. Finally drawing on a relational ontology (and the way it is expressed in the idea of a relational community in Catholic Social Teaching), we address the similarities and differences between the approaches to human development which were adopted in, respectively, the Catholic Church and the United Nations, which is another central institution with which Lebret interacted.
{"title":"Lebret’s Christian-inspired societal project and integral human development","authors":"N. Martins, Vítor Teixeira","doi":"10.1080/17449626.2021.1954052","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449626.2021.1954052","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In this article, we describe how Louis-Joseph Lebret’s work, propelled by his human-centred spirituality, contributed to the development of an approach aimed at the transformation of social and economic structures, so as to achieve integral human development. We discuss too the connections between Lebret’s legacy and the advancement of Integral Human Development within the Catholic Church. Finally drawing on a relational ontology (and the way it is expressed in the idea of a relational community in Catholic Social Teaching), we address the similarities and differences between the approaches to human development which were adopted in, respectively, the Catholic Church and the United Nations, which is another central institution with which Lebret interacted.","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":"42493895","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: 10.1080/17449626.2021.1954540
Vitalis Anaehobi
ABSTRACT This paper presents the contributions of the French Dominican priest Louis-Joseph Lebret to the emergence of development ethics. Starting from his life and experiences, it outlines his concept of development and its multiple dimensions. Development is presented as an interdisciplinary endeavour, open to many sources of knowledge. It is equally seen as a problem for the entire planet which should have the human ascent of all as its primary objective. This notion helped to introduce the idea of international solidarity into the concept of development. Development is equally presented as having a direct link to global peace. Emphasizing the important role that the West has to play in the planetary endeavour of development, Lebret proposed dialogue of civilizations as a befitting type of collaboration between the West and the rest of the world. His contributions are finally presented as having relevance for development in Africa today. This is done by examining his major ideas in the light of current African development initiatives.
{"title":"Lebret and the birth of development ethics within Catholic Social Teaching","authors":"Vitalis Anaehobi","doi":"10.1080/17449626.2021.1954540","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449626.2021.1954540","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper presents the contributions of the French Dominican priest Louis-Joseph Lebret to the emergence of development ethics. Starting from his life and experiences, it outlines his concept of development and its multiple dimensions. Development is presented as an interdisciplinary endeavour, open to many sources of knowledge. It is equally seen as a problem for the entire planet which should have the human ascent of all as its primary objective. This notion helped to introduce the idea of international solidarity into the concept of development. Development is equally presented as having a direct link to global peace. Emphasizing the important role that the West has to play in the planetary endeavour of development, Lebret proposed dialogue of civilizations as a befitting type of collaboration between the West and the rest of the world. His contributions are finally presented as having relevance for development in Africa today. This is done by examining his major ideas in the light of current African development initiatives.","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":"42607133","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 : 2021-01-02DOI: 10.1080/17449626.2021.1942141
Ben Cross
ABSTRACT Recent empirical literature suggests that some of the most prominent environmental policies that the Chinese government has pursued have involved at least some measure of participation from citizens. These findings suggest that at least some political authorities in China believe that effective environmental policies will require more participation. However, since the accounts of political legitimacy promulgated by the Chinese government have been developed in order to downplay the need for greater participation (at least in a liberal-democratic form), it is unclear whether these accounts of legitimacy can allow space for the kind of participation that successful environmental politics demands. In this article, I use a realist approach to political legitimacy to address this question. I argue that the dominant legitimation narratives in Chinese politics provide the government with legitimacy-related reasons to allow greater citizen participation in environmental politics, but also provide it with other legitimacy-related reasons to restrict participation.
{"title":"Participation and legitimacy in Chinese environmental politics: a realist approach","authors":"Ben Cross","doi":"10.1080/17449626.2021.1942141","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449626.2021.1942141","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Recent empirical literature suggests that some of the most prominent environmental policies that the Chinese government has pursued have involved at least some measure of participation from citizens. These findings suggest that at least some political authorities in China believe that effective environmental policies will require more participation. However, since the accounts of political legitimacy promulgated by the Chinese government have been developed in order to downplay the need for greater participation (at least in a liberal-democratic form), it is unclear whether these accounts of legitimacy can allow space for the kind of participation that successful environmental politics demands. In this article, I use a realist approach to political legitimacy to address this question. I argue that the dominant legitimation narratives in Chinese politics provide the government with legitimacy-related reasons to allow greater citizen participation in environmental politics, but also provide it with other legitimacy-related reasons to restrict participation.","PeriodicalId":35191,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Global Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49189123","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 : 2021-01-02DOI: 10.1080/17449626.2021.1964579
Tingyang Zhao 赵汀阳
ABSTRACT As an idealist form of realism, or realist form of idealism, the system of ‘All-under-Heaven’ (tianxia 天下) seeks to find a rational and optimal solution to the problem of political conflict. However, it does not purport to offer the promise of universal happiness for all. Rather, this system envisages the possibility of another world; one of peace, general security, and civilizational vigor. In this sense, it is radically different from various proclamations of ‘the end of history’. The following aspects of the notion of tianxia are particularly worth emphasizing: firstly, ‘All-under-Heaven’ is not a utopia at all, but rather an ideal that can actually be realized. Secondly, the goal of a politics of tianxia is to resolve the problem of conflict by transforming hostility into hospitality, thus offering a new conception of politics beyond the struggle for power. Thirdly, the vision of ‘All-under-Heaven’ is grounded in three constitutive concepts, namely the ‘internalization of the world’, relational rationality, and ‘Confucian Improvement’, which together constitute a politics capable of transforming hostility into hospitality.
{"title":"‘All-under-Heaven’ (tianxia 天下): between idealism and realism","authors":"Tingyang Zhao 赵汀阳","doi":"10.1080/17449626.2021.1964579","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449626.2021.1964579","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT As an idealist form of realism, or realist form of idealism, the system of ‘All-under-Heaven’ (tianxia 天下) seeks to find a rational and optimal solution to the problem of political conflict. However, it does not purport to offer the promise of universal happiness for all. Rather, this system envisages the possibility of another world; one of peace, general security, and civilizational vigor. In this sense, it is radically different from various proclamations of ‘the end of history’. The following aspects of the notion of tianxia are particularly worth emphasizing: firstly, ‘All-under-Heaven’ is not a utopia at all, but rather an ideal that can actually be realized. Secondly, the goal of a politics of tianxia is to resolve the problem of conflict by transforming hostility into hospitality, thus offering a new conception of politics beyond the struggle for power. Thirdly, the vision of ‘All-under-Heaven’ is grounded in three constitutive concepts, namely the ‘internalization of the world’, relational rationality, and ‘Confucian Improvement’, which together constitute a politics capable of transforming hostility into hospitality.","PeriodicalId":35191,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Global Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45227066","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 : 2021-01-02DOI: 10.1080/17449626.2021.1946836
Guli-Sanam Karimova, S. LeMay
ABSTRACT Many questions arise in any Western discussion of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Does China’s BRI represent a new world order that aligns with European values and interests? Alternatively, is it an attempt by China to dominate Eurasia and most of the world economically and socially? The West seems to have no clear answer to these and related questions. In this work, we look at one of the many potential theaters for tension: the relationship between BRI and international, mostly Western, standards. We highlight the BRI notion as a contested space between two distinct discourses: 1) discourse of Chinese dominance, with little influence from existing Western standards; 2) discourse of merging Western and Asian values that benefits all of humanity, an approach that fits with tianxia. This work examines Chinese norms and values in the context of these questions: 1) to what extent are written Western standards like the UN Global Compact compatible with the BRI? And 2) to what extent can those standards adapt to BRI, thus changing the European-dominated world order? We conclude with directions for future research on the role of standards in the BRI.
{"title":"The Belt and Road Initiative, world order, and international standards: continuity, adaptation, or discontinuity?","authors":"Guli-Sanam Karimova, S. LeMay","doi":"10.1080/17449626.2021.1946836","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449626.2021.1946836","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Many questions arise in any Western discussion of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Does China’s BRI represent a new world order that aligns with European values and interests? Alternatively, is it an attempt by China to dominate Eurasia and most of the world economically and socially? The West seems to have no clear answer to these and related questions. In this work, we look at one of the many potential theaters for tension: the relationship between BRI and international, mostly Western, standards. We highlight the BRI notion as a contested space between two distinct discourses: 1) discourse of Chinese dominance, with little influence from existing Western standards; 2) discourse of merging Western and Asian values that benefits all of humanity, an approach that fits with tianxia. This work examines Chinese norms and values in the context of these questions: 1) to what extent are written Western standards like the UN Global Compact compatible with the BRI? And 2) to what extent can those standards adapt to BRI, thus changing the European-dominated world order? We conclude with directions for future research on the role of standards in the BRI.","PeriodicalId":35191,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Global Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48782146","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 : 2021-01-02DOI: 10.1080/17449626.2021.1967185
Xiao Ouyang
ABSTRACT Tianxia and renlei mingyun gongtongti are two Chinese concepts that are of significance for reflecting on ‘China and Global Development.’ Both present a revival of cosmopolitanism in China, while accompanied by a calling for Chinese rejuvenation. In defining cosmopolitanism in terms of two intrinsic conditions – common community and universal equality – I argue that cosmopolitanism rooted in the Chinese philosophical tradition may provide a distinct solution to the equality condition from the Western liberal-individualist ones. I propose the notion of Confucian relational equality. There is indeed ‘inequality’ for the roles in a relation, in the sense that obligations and norms of conduct are defined differently and accomplished codependently. However, ideally, all full-fledged person-ings (understood as life stories in a society in a given historical period) are constituted by a dynamic and unfolding manifold of always specific relations concretized by various social roles, and usually do bear a comparable amount of functionally equivalent primary roles. As roles co-emerge among person-ings, relational equality is only possible when roles are continuously generated and sustained by transmission, which entails that community with a history, rather than an abstract and ontological individual, is a prerequisite.
{"title":"‘Tianxia’ and ‘Renlei mingyun gongtongti': a revival of cosmopolitanism in a Chinese cultural disguise?","authors":"Xiao Ouyang","doi":"10.1080/17449626.2021.1967185","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449626.2021.1967185","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Tianxia and renlei mingyun gongtongti are two Chinese concepts that are of significance for reflecting on ‘China and Global Development.’ Both present a revival of cosmopolitanism in China, while accompanied by a calling for Chinese rejuvenation. In defining cosmopolitanism in terms of two intrinsic conditions – common community and universal equality – I argue that cosmopolitanism rooted in the Chinese philosophical tradition may provide a distinct solution to the equality condition from the Western liberal-individualist ones. I propose the notion of Confucian relational equality. There is indeed ‘inequality’ for the roles in a relation, in the sense that obligations and norms of conduct are defined differently and accomplished codependently. However, ideally, all full-fledged person-ings (understood as life stories in a society in a given historical period) are constituted by a dynamic and unfolding manifold of always specific relations concretized by various social roles, and usually do bear a comparable amount of functionally equivalent primary roles. As roles co-emerge among person-ings, relational equality is only possible when roles are continuously generated and sustained by transmission, which entails that community with a history, rather than an abstract and ontological individual, is a prerequisite.","PeriodicalId":35191,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Global Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48942368","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 : 2021-01-02DOI: 10.1080/17449626.2021.1942140
R. Ames
ABSTRACT At the end of 2013, China introduced what it calls the ‘One Belt, One Road Initiative’ (BRI) (yidaiyiluchangyi 一带一路战倡议). From a Chinese perspective, this initiative is nothing less than a strategy to replace the existing world order in all of its parts with a vision of ‘intra-national relations’ that emerges out of traditional Chinese thinking reaching back as early as the Yijing 易经or Book of Changes. The self-conscious rhetoric of BRI is ‘equity’ (gongying 共赢) and ‘diversity’ interpreted through the language of a ‘shared future for the human community’ (renleimingyun gongtongti人类命运共同体). China can be challenged to live up to its own rhetoric. John Dewey makes a helpful distinction between the ‘idea’ and the political ‘forms’ of democracy, where his ‘idea’ of democracy is his own account of equity and shared diversity. Again, there is a direct link between Dewey’s ‘idea’ of democracy and his ‘internationalism.’ Can we use Dewey’s ‘idea’ of democracy to formulate the ‘idea’ of BRI as a Confucian version of ‘internationalism?’
{"title":"On the cusp of a new world order? a dialogue between Confucianism and Dewey and pragmatism","authors":"R. Ames","doi":"10.1080/17449626.2021.1942140","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449626.2021.1942140","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT At the end of 2013, China introduced what it calls the ‘One Belt, One Road Initiative’ (BRI) (yidaiyiluchangyi 一带一路战倡议). From a Chinese perspective, this initiative is nothing less than a strategy to replace the existing world order in all of its parts with a vision of ‘intra-national relations’ that emerges out of traditional Chinese thinking reaching back as early as the Yijing 易经or Book of Changes. The self-conscious rhetoric of BRI is ‘equity’ (gongying 共赢) and ‘diversity’ interpreted through the language of a ‘shared future for the human community’ (renleimingyun gongtongti人类命运共同体). China can be challenged to live up to its own rhetoric. John Dewey makes a helpful distinction between the ‘idea’ and the political ‘forms’ of democracy, where his ‘idea’ of democracy is his own account of equity and shared diversity. Again, there is a direct link between Dewey’s ‘idea’ of democracy and his ‘internationalism.’ Can we use Dewey’s ‘idea’ of democracy to formulate the ‘idea’ of BRI as a Confucian version of ‘internationalism?’","PeriodicalId":35191,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Global Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46686865","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 : 2021-01-02DOI: 10.1080/17449626.2021.1946838
T. Rockmore
ABSTRACT The People’s Republic of China links Marxism to overcoming poverty. Different kinds of poverty include economic and non-economic or developmental forms. China seems to be or at least mainly concerned with economic poverty that, until the onset of the coronavirus pandemic, was widespread but rapidly receding. Marx is especially concerned with non-economic developmental poverty, the inability to go beyond meeting basic reproductive needs to develop as an individual human being. I argue that the Chinese effort to meet basic reproductive needs is directed towards overcoming poverty arising within capitalism, hence it fails to bring about the transition from capitalism to communism that Marx thinks is necessary for realizing human individuality. Contemporary China clearly deserves praise for its role in overcoming economic poverty. Yet poverty due to the inability to develop as a full developed human being in a contemporary social context is not now and was not then decreasing, but at the time of this writing is even increasing. If that is correct, then it is unclear that Chinese Marxism is now or even earlier prior to the pandemic was on the road to successfully alleviating poverty, so it is unclear that Marxism was or is an appropriate model for Chinese development.
{"title":"Marx, Chinese Marxism and poverty","authors":"T. Rockmore","doi":"10.1080/17449626.2021.1946838","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449626.2021.1946838","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The People’s Republic of China links Marxism to overcoming poverty. Different kinds of poverty include economic and non-economic or developmental forms. China seems to be or at least mainly concerned with economic poverty that, until the onset of the coronavirus pandemic, was widespread but rapidly receding. Marx is especially concerned with non-economic developmental poverty, the inability to go beyond meeting basic reproductive needs to develop as an individual human being. I argue that the Chinese effort to meet basic reproductive needs is directed towards overcoming poverty arising within capitalism, hence it fails to bring about the transition from capitalism to communism that Marx thinks is necessary for realizing human individuality. Contemporary China clearly deserves praise for its role in overcoming economic poverty. Yet poverty due to the inability to develop as a full developed human being in a contemporary social context is not now and was not then decreasing, but at the time of this writing is even increasing. If that is correct, then it is unclear that Chinese Marxism is now or even earlier prior to the pandemic was on the road to successfully alleviating poverty, so it is unclear that Marxism was or is an appropriate model for Chinese development.","PeriodicalId":35191,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Global Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46460201","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 : 2021-01-02DOI: 10.1080/17449626.2021.1946837
Joshua Rayman
ABSTRACT The past forty years of world development have seen multiple operational frameworks, most notably, the neoliberal Washington Consensus or structural adjustment policies (1981–2001), the international development framework guided by the United Nations Millennium Development Goals (MDG, 2000–2015), and the Chinese Economic Model or Beijing Consensus emerging from Deng Xiaoping’s reforms (1978-present). I criticize the Washington Consensus as an economic, ethical-political, and environmental failure. I cast doubt both on the novelty and efficacy of the frameworks to enact the Millennium Development Goals by showing that they largely repackage structural adjustment policies in democratic terms and contribute far less to recent global successes than alternative Chinese and Indian models. I describe the Chinese Economic Model as both a far more successful domestic economic alternative to the hegemonic Western models and a problematic export with the potential to transform as well as to destabilize developing countries. Finally, I articulate conditions for an alternative that would enact the democratic rhetoric of the Millennium Development Goals, learn from the domestic scale of infrastructure and education spending, the national focus, local implementation, and recent environmental experiments of the Chinese Economic Model, and recognize the environment’s fundamental significance to development.
{"title":"China’s challenge to world development paradigms","authors":"Joshua Rayman","doi":"10.1080/17449626.2021.1946837","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449626.2021.1946837","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The past forty years of world development have seen multiple operational frameworks, most notably, the neoliberal Washington Consensus or structural adjustment policies (1981–2001), the international development framework guided by the United Nations Millennium Development Goals (MDG, 2000–2015), and the Chinese Economic Model or Beijing Consensus emerging from Deng Xiaoping’s reforms (1978-present). I criticize the Washington Consensus as an economic, ethical-political, and environmental failure. I cast doubt both on the novelty and efficacy of the frameworks to enact the Millennium Development Goals by showing that they largely repackage structural adjustment policies in democratic terms and contribute far less to recent global successes than alternative Chinese and Indian models. I describe the Chinese Economic Model as both a far more successful domestic economic alternative to the hegemonic Western models and a problematic export with the potential to transform as well as to destabilize developing countries. Finally, I articulate conditions for an alternative that would enact the democratic rhetoric of the Millennium Development Goals, learn from the domestic scale of infrastructure and education spending, the national focus, local implementation, and recent environmental experiments of the Chinese Economic Model, and recognize the environment’s fundamental significance to development.","PeriodicalId":35191,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Global Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47030311","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 : 2020-09-01DOI: 10.1080/17449626.2021.1876141
L. Alcoff
ABSTRACT Serene Khader’s effort to develop a decolonized approach to transnational feminism takes a helpfully nonideal approach. Much of decolonial theory has criticized universalism in order to espouse pluralism. Khader attempts to develop a form of minimalist universalism compatible with a significant dose of pluralism in regard to how we understand liberation from gender-based forms of oppression, and she effectively shows how the nonideal, meliorative approach can do this. I address three issues here: (1) the serious challenge her universalist account poses to critical theory and some other trends in continental philosophy; (2) the persuasive analysis of, approach to, and critique that she makes of ‘gender role eliminativism’ and (3) the epistemic and dialogic questions left remaining in her defense of feminist universalism, in relation to who can theoretically formulate the universal.
{"title":"Khader’s minimalist, pluralist universalism","authors":"L. Alcoff","doi":"10.1080/17449626.2021.1876141","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449626.2021.1876141","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Serene Khader’s effort to develop a decolonized approach to transnational feminism takes a helpfully nonideal approach. Much of decolonial theory has criticized universalism in order to espouse pluralism. Khader attempts to develop a form of minimalist universalism compatible with a significant dose of pluralism in regard to how we understand liberation from gender-based forms of oppression, and she effectively shows how the nonideal, meliorative approach can do this. I address three issues here: (1) the serious challenge her universalist account poses to critical theory and some other trends in continental philosophy; (2) the persuasive analysis of, approach to, and critique that she makes of ‘gender role eliminativism’ and (3) the epistemic and dialogic questions left remaining in her defense of feminist universalism, in relation to who can theoretically formulate the universal.","PeriodicalId":35191,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Global Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17449626.2021.1876141","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45614318","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：