首页 > 最新文献

Politics Philosophy & Economics最新文献

英文 中文
Questioning the feasibility and justice of basic income accounting for migration 质疑基本收入解释移民的可行性和公平性
IF 0.9 2区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS Pub Date : 2021-07-22 DOI: 10.1177/1470594X211032394
Verena Löffler
When studying the feasibility and justice of basic income, researchers usually assume that policymakers would be introducing the unconditional benefit to a closed economic entity. When contemplating the introduction of a universal policy, few researchers take into consideration the fact that citizens and foreigners migrate, and that this movement alters the size and skill structure of the population. This article addresses this oversight by analyzing how basic income schemes based on residence or citizenship may affect tax base, wages, and employment while incorporating migration incentives. The discussion is based upon neoclassical labor supply and migration theory and informed by the conjectured economic effects from a normative perspective. This research suggests that a basic income would create migration incentives that reduce the tax base, leading us to question this policy’s feasibility. Moreover, the flow-on effects of migration call into question the justice of both residence-based and citizenship-based basic income schemes. Therefore, this article sheds light on how basic income’s feasibility and justice relate to each other and identifies the benefits and further opportunities for interdisciplinary social policy research.
在研究基本收入的可行性和公平性时,研究人员通常假设政策制定者将向一个封闭的经济实体引入无条件的福利。在考虑引入一项普遍政策时,很少有研究人员考虑到公民和外国人迁移的事实,这种迁移改变了人口的规模和技能结构。本文通过分析基于居住或公民身份的基本收入计划在纳入移民激励措施的同时如何影响税基、工资和就业,来解决这种监督问题。本文的讨论基于新古典的劳动力供给和迁移理论,并从规范的角度推测经济效应。这项研究表明,基本收入将产生减少税基的移民激励,这使我们质疑这项政策的可行性。此外,移民的流动效应使基于居住地和基于公民身份的基本收入计划的公正性受到质疑。因此,本文阐明了基本收入的可行性和公平性是如何相互关联的,并确定了跨学科社会政策研究的好处和进一步的机会。
{"title":"Questioning the feasibility and justice of basic income accounting for migration","authors":"Verena Löffler","doi":"10.1177/1470594X211032394","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1470594X211032394","url":null,"abstract":"When studying the feasibility and justice of basic income, researchers usually assume that policymakers would be introducing the unconditional benefit to a closed economic entity. When contemplating the introduction of a universal policy, few researchers take into consideration the fact that citizens and foreigners migrate, and that this movement alters the size and skill structure of the population. This article addresses this oversight by analyzing how basic income schemes based on residence or citizenship may affect tax base, wages, and employment while incorporating migration incentives. The discussion is based upon neoclassical labor supply and migration theory and informed by the conjectured economic effects from a normative perspective. This research suggests that a basic income would create migration incentives that reduce the tax base, leading us to question this policy’s feasibility. Moreover, the flow-on effects of migration call into question the justice of both residence-based and citizenship-based basic income schemes. Therefore, this article sheds light on how basic income’s feasibility and justice relate to each other and identifies the benefits and further opportunities for interdisciplinary social policy research.","PeriodicalId":45971,"journal":{"name":"Politics Philosophy & Economics","volume":"65 1","pages":"273 - 314"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"91007933","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
On the (mis)classification of paid labor: When should gig workers have employee status? 关于有偿劳动的(错误)分类:什么时候零工应该具有雇员身份?
IF 0.9 2区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS Pub Date : 2021-05-03 DOI: 10.1177/1470594X211015467
D. Halliday
The emergence of so-called ‘gig work’, particularly that sold through digital platforms accessed through smartphone apps, has led to disputes about the proper classification of workers: Should platform workers be classified as independent contractors (as platforms typically insist), or as employees of the platforms through which they sell labor (as workers often claim)? Such disputes have urgency due to the way in which employee status is necessary to access certain benefits such as a minimum wage, sick pay, and so on. In addition, classification disputes have philosophical significance because their resolution requires some foundational account of why the law should make a distinction between employed and freelance workers in the first place. This paper aims to fill this foundational gap. Central to it is the idea that employment involves a worker ceding certain freedoms in return for a degree of security, at least with respect to income. Insofar as the misclassification objection has force against digital platforms, it is when a platform is attempting to have it both ways: Workers are giving up freedom but not being granted a proportionate increase in security. As I shall explain, this approach offers some flexibility as to how actual disputes might be resolved – justice may be indifferent between whether platforms offer greater security or permit workers greater freedom, provided they do at least one of these things.
所谓的“零工”的出现,尤其是通过智能手机应用程序访问的数字平台销售的零工,引发了关于工人正确分类的争议:平台工人应该被归类为独立承包商(平台通常坚持),还是作为他们出售劳动力的平台的雇员(工人经常声称)?这种纠纷具有紧迫性,因为雇员的身份是获得某些福利(如最低工资、病假工资等)所必需的。此外,分类纠纷具有哲学意义,因为它们的解决需要一些基本的解释,为什么法律首先应该区分雇佣工人和自由职业者。本文旨在填补这一基础空白。它的核心思想是,就业意味着工人放弃一定的自由,以换取一定程度的安全,至少在收入方面。就错误分类的反对意见对数字平台产生的影响而言,这是一个平台试图两全兼顾的情况:工人放弃了自由,但没有得到相应的安全提升。正如我将解释的那样,这种方法在如何解决实际纠纷方面提供了一些灵活性——在平台是否提供更大的安全或允许工人更大的自由之间,只要他们至少做到其中一件事,司法可能是无关紧要的。
{"title":"On the (mis)classification of paid labor: When should gig workers have employee status?","authors":"D. Halliday","doi":"10.1177/1470594X211015467","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1470594X211015467","url":null,"abstract":"The emergence of so-called ‘gig work’, particularly that sold through digital platforms accessed through smartphone apps, has led to disputes about the proper classification of workers: Should platform workers be classified as independent contractors (as platforms typically insist), or as employees of the platforms through which they sell labor (as workers often claim)? Such disputes have urgency due to the way in which employee status is necessary to access certain benefits such as a minimum wage, sick pay, and so on. In addition, classification disputes have philosophical significance because their resolution requires some foundational account of why the law should make a distinction between employed and freelance workers in the first place. This paper aims to fill this foundational gap. Central to it is the idea that employment involves a worker ceding certain freedoms in return for a degree of security, at least with respect to income. Insofar as the misclassification objection has force against digital platforms, it is when a platform is attempting to have it both ways: Workers are giving up freedom but not being granted a proportionate increase in security. As I shall explain, this approach offers some flexibility as to how actual disputes might be resolved – justice may be indifferent between whether platforms offer greater security or permit workers greater freedom, provided they do at least one of these things.","PeriodicalId":45971,"journal":{"name":"Politics Philosophy & Economics","volume":"52 1","pages":"229 - 250"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80366245","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8
Money creation, debt, and justice 货币创造、债务和正义
IF 0.9 2区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS Pub Date : 2021-05-01 DOI: 10.1177/1470594X21999736
P. Dietsch
Theories of justice rely on a variety of criteria to determine what social arrangements should be considered just. For most theories, the distribution of financial resources matters. However, they take the existence of money as a given and tend to ignore the way in which the creation of money impacts distributive justice. Those with access to collateral are favoured in the creation of credit or debt, which represents the main form of money today. Appealing to the idea that access to credit confers freedom, and that inequalities in this freedom are morally arbitrary, this article shows how the advantage to those with collateral plays out in different ways in today’s economy. The article identifies several forms of bias inherent in money creation, and its subsequent destruction: loans from commercial banks to individuals and corporations, interbank lending, lending from central banks to commercial banks, and selective bail-outs by central banks. These are not mere inequalities: they are unjust since alternative designs of the financial architecture exist that would significantly reduce them. The paper focuses on one possible reform with the potential to address several of the types of bias identified, namely the separation of money creation from private bank credit.
正义理论依赖于各种各样的标准来确定什么样的社会安排应该被认为是正义的。对大多数理论来说,金融资源的分配很重要。然而,他们认为货币的存在是既定的,并倾向于忽视货币的创造对分配正义的影响。那些能够获得抵押品的人在创造信贷或债务方面受到青睐,这代表了当今货币的主要形式。这篇文章提出了这样一个观点,即获得信贷意味着自由,而这种自由中的不平等在道德上是任意的,它展示了在当今的经济中,有抵押品的人的优势是如何以不同的方式发挥作用的。这篇文章指出了货币创造及其随后的破坏中固有的几种形式的偏见:商业银行向个人和公司的贷款,银行间贷款,中央银行向商业银行的贷款,以及中央银行的选择性纾困。这些不仅仅是不平等:它们是不公平的,因为存在着可以显著减少不平等的金融架构替代设计。本文重点讨论了一项可能的改革,该改革有可能解决已确定的几种偏见,即将货币创造与私人银行信贷分离。
{"title":"Money creation, debt, and justice","authors":"P. Dietsch","doi":"10.1177/1470594X21999736","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1470594X21999736","url":null,"abstract":"Theories of justice rely on a variety of criteria to determine what social arrangements should be considered just. For most theories, the distribution of financial resources matters. However, they take the existence of money as a given and tend to ignore the way in which the creation of money impacts distributive justice. Those with access to collateral are favoured in the creation of credit or debt, which represents the main form of money today. Appealing to the idea that access to credit confers freedom, and that inequalities in this freedom are morally arbitrary, this article shows how the advantage to those with collateral plays out in different ways in today’s economy. The article identifies several forms of bias inherent in money creation, and its subsequent destruction: loans from commercial banks to individuals and corporations, interbank lending, lending from central banks to commercial banks, and selective bail-outs by central banks. These are not mere inequalities: they are unjust since alternative designs of the financial architecture exist that would significantly reduce them. The paper focuses on one possible reform with the potential to address several of the types of bias identified, namely the separation of money creation from private bank credit.","PeriodicalId":45971,"journal":{"name":"Politics Philosophy & Economics","volume":"19 1","pages":"151 - 179"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72565819","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Assessing climate policies: Catastrophe avoidance and the right to sustainable development 评估气候政策:避免灾难与可持续发展权
IF 0.9 2区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS Pub Date : 2021-05-01 DOI: 10.1177/1470594X211003334
D. Callies, D. Moellendorf
With the significant disconnect between the collective aim of limiting warming to well below 2°C and the current means proposed to achieve such an aim, the goal of this paper is to offer a moral assessment of prominent alternatives to current international climate policy. To do so, we’ll outline five different policy routes that could potentially bring the means and goal in line. Those five policy routes are: (1) exceed 2°C; (2) limit warming to less than 2°C by economic de-growth; (3) limit warming to less than 2°C by traditional mitigation only; (4) limit warming to less than 2°C by traditional mitigation and widespread deployment of Negative Emissions Technologies (NETs); and (5) limit warming to less than 2°C by traditional mitigation, NETs, and Solar Radiation Management as a fallback. In assessing these five policy routes, we rely primarily upon two moral considerations: the avoidance of catastrophic climate change and the right to sustainable development. We’ll conclude that we should continue to aim at the two-degree target, and that to get there we should use aggressive mitigation, pursue the deployment of NETs, and continue to research SRM.
由于将升温限制在远低于2°C的集体目标与目前为实现这一目标而提出的手段之间存在重大脱节,本文的目标是对当前国际气候政策的主要替代方案进行道德评估。为此,我们将概述五种不同的政策路线,这些路线可能会使手段和目标保持一致。这五个策略路线是:(1)超过2°C;(2)通过减少经济增长将升温限制在2°C以下;(3)仅通过传统的减缓措施将升温限制在2°C以下;(4)通过传统的减缓和广泛部署负排放技术,将升温限制在2°C以下;(5)通过传统的减缓、净网和太阳辐射管理作为退路,将升温限制在2°C以下。在评估这五条政策路线时,我们主要依靠两个道德考虑:避免灾难性的气候变化和可持续发展的权利。我们将得出结论,我们应该继续以2度的目标为目标,为了达到这个目标,我们应该采取积极的缓解措施,追求net的部署,并继续研究SRM。
{"title":"Assessing climate policies: Catastrophe avoidance and the right to sustainable development","authors":"D. Callies, D. Moellendorf","doi":"10.1177/1470594X211003334","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1470594X211003334","url":null,"abstract":"With the significant disconnect between the collective aim of limiting warming to well below 2°C and the current means proposed to achieve such an aim, the goal of this paper is to offer a moral assessment of prominent alternatives to current international climate policy. To do so, we’ll outline five different policy routes that could potentially bring the means and goal in line. Those five policy routes are: (1) exceed 2°C; (2) limit warming to less than 2°C by economic de-growth; (3) limit warming to less than 2°C by traditional mitigation only; (4) limit warming to less than 2°C by traditional mitigation and widespread deployment of Negative Emissions Technologies (NETs); and (5) limit warming to less than 2°C by traditional mitigation, NETs, and Solar Radiation Management as a fallback. In assessing these five policy routes, we rely primarily upon two moral considerations: the avoidance of catastrophic climate change and the right to sustainable development. We’ll conclude that we should continue to aim at the two-degree target, and that to get there we should use aggressive mitigation, pursue the deployment of NETs, and continue to research SRM.","PeriodicalId":45971,"journal":{"name":"Politics Philosophy & Economics","volume":"80 1","pages":"127 - 150"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81576505","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5
Who should fight domination? Individual responsibility and structural injustice 谁应该反抗统治?个人责任和结构性不公
IF 0.9 2区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS Pub Date : 2021-04-06 DOI: 10.1177/1470594X211003333
Dorothea Gädeke
Who is responsible for fighting domination? Answering this question, I argue, requires taking the structural dimension of domination seriously to avoid unwillingly reproducing domination in the name of justice. Having cast domination as a structural injustice that refers to structurally constituted positions of power and disempowerment, I show that the outcome-based, the capacity-based and the social connection model suggested in literature on responsibility, fail to fully meet this challenge. Drawing on insights from all of them, I propose an account that proves more sensitive towards the power dynamics at play in fighting domination. It is based on a fundamental duty of justice, which gives rise to two kinds of responsibility. Dominators, dominated and peripheral agents share political responsibility for domination in virtue of reproducing domination by occupying a position within structures of dominating power; they are required to acknowledge and undermine their position of power or disempowerment rather than simply using and thus tacitly reaffirming it. Political responsibility for domination is distinct from moral responsibility for acting within contexts of domination; in fact, ignoring this difference risks reproducing rather than transforming relations of domination. Bystanders who are not implicated in reproducing domination bear limited remedial responsibility to support this struggle.
谁负责对抗统治?回答这个问题,我认为,需要认真对待统治的结构维度,以避免以正义的名义不情愿地复制统治。我将统治视为一种结构性的不公正,指的是结构上构成的权力和剥夺权力的地位,我表明,在责任文献中提出的基于结果、基于能力和社会联系的模型,未能完全应对这一挑战。根据他们所有人的见解,我提出了一种对对抗统治的权力动态更敏感的解释。它以正义的基本义务为基础,这就产生了两种责任。支配者、被支配者和外围行动者通过占据支配权力结构内的位置来再生产支配,从而分担支配的政治责任;他们被要求承认和破坏他们的权力地位或被剥夺权力,而不是简单地使用它,从而默默地重申它。统治的政治责任不同于在统治背景下行动的道德责任;事实上,忽视这种差异有可能再现而不是改变统治关系。不涉及再生产统治的旁观者对支持这场斗争承担有限的补救责任。
{"title":"Who should fight domination? Individual responsibility and structural injustice","authors":"Dorothea Gädeke","doi":"10.1177/1470594X211003333","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1470594X211003333","url":null,"abstract":"Who is responsible for fighting domination? Answering this question, I argue, requires taking the structural dimension of domination seriously to avoid unwillingly reproducing domination in the name of justice. Having cast domination as a structural injustice that refers to structurally constituted positions of power and disempowerment, I show that the outcome-based, the capacity-based and the social connection model suggested in literature on responsibility, fail to fully meet this challenge. Drawing on insights from all of them, I propose an account that proves more sensitive towards the power dynamics at play in fighting domination. It is based on a fundamental duty of justice, which gives rise to two kinds of responsibility. Dominators, dominated and peripheral agents share political responsibility for domination in virtue of reproducing domination by occupying a position within structures of dominating power; they are required to acknowledge and undermine their position of power or disempowerment rather than simply using and thus tacitly reaffirming it. Political responsibility for domination is distinct from moral responsibility for acting within contexts of domination; in fact, ignoring this difference risks reproducing rather than transforming relations of domination. Bystanders who are not implicated in reproducing domination bear limited remedial responsibility to support this struggle.","PeriodicalId":45971,"journal":{"name":"Politics Philosophy & Economics","volume":"77 6","pages":"180 - 201"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1470594X211003333","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72404938","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
On the international investment regime: A critique from equality 论国际投资体制:来自平等的批判
IF 0.9 2区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS Pub Date : 2021-04-06 DOI: 10.1177/1470594X211005652
Shuk Ying Chan
The international investment regime has come under increasing scrutiny, with several developing countries withdrawing from bilateral investment treaties in recent years. A central worry raised by critics is that investment treaties undermine national self-determination. Proposed reforms to the regime have focused on rebalancing the distribution of power between states and investors to restore ‘enlarged regulatory space’ for the former. Contra this critique from national self-determination, in this paper I argue that infringements on national self- determination cannot alone explain why the investment regime is morally problematic. Instead, on this egalitarian view, the regime is objectionable because it empowers a class of agents, whose interests are reliably opposed to egalitarian economic policy, to constrain national self-determination. In effect, the investment regime undermines states’ capacity to address inequality within and between states and is unjust for that reason. The moral and practical upshot is that reforms to the regime ought to empower disadvantaged groups to exert disproportionate leverage over the terms and practice of international investment, and to appeal to global institutions to do so. In other words, our moral assessment of a given global institution or practice should not depend on whether it constrains national self-determination, but on who it empowers to do so.
近年来,随着一些发展中国家退出双边投资条约,国际投资制度受到越来越多的审查。批评者提出的一个主要担忧是,投资条约削弱了民族自决。改革方案的重点是重新平衡政府与投资者之间的权力分配,以恢复政府“扩大的监管空间”。与民族自决的批评相反,在本文中,我认为侵犯民族自决不能单独解释为什么投资制度在道德上有问题。相反,从这种平等主义的观点来看,这个政权是令人反感的,因为它赋予了一群代理人限制民族自决的权力,而这些代理人的利益确实与平等主义的经济政策背道而驰。实际上,投资机制削弱了各国解决国家内部和国家之间不平等问题的能力,因此是不公正的。道德和实践的结果是,对该制度的改革应赋予弱势群体权力,使其能够对国际投资的条款和做法施加不成比例的影响,并呼吁全球机构这样做。换句话说,我们对一个给定的全球机构或实践的道德评价不应该取决于它是否限制了民族自决,而应该取决于它赋予了谁这样做的权力。
{"title":"On the international investment regime: A critique from equality","authors":"Shuk Ying Chan","doi":"10.1177/1470594X211005652","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1470594X211005652","url":null,"abstract":"The international investment regime has come under increasing scrutiny, with several developing countries withdrawing from bilateral investment treaties in recent years. A central worry raised by critics is that investment treaties undermine national self-determination. Proposed reforms to the regime have focused on rebalancing the distribution of power between states and investors to restore ‘enlarged regulatory space’ for the former. Contra this critique from national self-determination, in this paper I argue that infringements on national self- determination cannot alone explain why the investment regime is morally problematic. Instead, on this egalitarian view, the regime is objectionable because it empowers a class of agents, whose interests are reliably opposed to egalitarian economic policy, to constrain national self-determination. In effect, the investment regime undermines states’ capacity to address inequality within and between states and is unjust for that reason. The moral and practical upshot is that reforms to the regime ought to empower disadvantaged groups to exert disproportionate leverage over the terms and practice of international investment, and to appeal to global institutions to do so. In other words, our moral assessment of a given global institution or practice should not depend on whether it constrains national self-determination, but on who it empowers to do so.","PeriodicalId":45971,"journal":{"name":"Politics Philosophy & Economics","volume":"57 1","pages":"202 - 226"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85954420","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Exploitation and effective altruism 剥削和有效利他主义
IF 0.9 2区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS Pub Date : 2021-02-19 DOI: 10.1177/1470594X21994495
Daniel Muñoz
How could it be wrong to exploit – say, by paying sweatshop wages – if the exploited party benefits? How could it be wrong to do something gratuitously bad – like giving to a wasteful charity – if that is better than permissibly doing nothing? Joe Horton argues that these puzzles, known as the Exploitation Problem and All or Nothing Problem, have no unified answer. I propose one and pose a challenge for Horton’s take on the Exploitation Problem.
如果被剥削方从中受益,那么剥削——比如支付血汗工厂的工资——怎么可能是错的呢?如果做一些无缘无故的坏事——比如给一个浪费的慈善机构捐款——比什么都不做要好,那怎么可能是错的呢?乔·霍顿(Joe Horton)认为,这些被称为“剥削问题”和“全有或全无问题”的谜题没有统一的答案。我提出了一个问题,并对霍顿关于剥削问题的观点提出了挑战。
{"title":"Exploitation and effective altruism","authors":"Daniel Muñoz","doi":"10.1177/1470594X21994495","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1470594X21994495","url":null,"abstract":"How could it be wrong to exploit – say, by paying sweatshop wages – if the exploited party benefits? How could it be wrong to do something gratuitously bad – like giving to a wasteful charity – if that is better than permissibly doing nothing? Joe Horton argues that these puzzles, known as the Exploitation Problem and All or Nothing Problem, have no unified answer. I propose one and pose a challenge for Horton’s take on the Exploitation Problem.","PeriodicalId":45971,"journal":{"name":"Politics Philosophy & Economics","volume":"11 1","pages":"409 - 423"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-02-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72999592","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
What’s wrong with everyday lookism? 日常外貌歧视有什么错?
IF 0.9 2区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS Pub Date : 2021-02-07 DOI: 10.1177/1470594X20982051
Andrew Mason
Everyday lookism, by which I mean the widespread practice of commenting upon and judging the appearance of others, is often regarded as morally troubling. But when, and why, is it morally problematic? I argue that in many cases everyday lookism is wrongful because it involves morally objectionable appearance discrimination. I consider various respects in which everyday lookism can be morally objectionable in virtue of the acts of wrongful discrimination it involves. I argue that these acts are wrongful when they are demeaning, or when they have unjust consequences whether singly or cumulatively. There are a number of ways in which they may have unjust consequences. First, the appearance norms in which these acts are rooted may be biased in such a way that the acts contribute to creating an unjust distribution of benefits and burdens. Second, these acts may combine to make everyday lookism oppressive in virtue of impairing the personal autonomy of its victims or contributing to doing so. Third, these acts may be unjustly harmful in terms of their effects.
日常的外貌主义,我指的是评论和评判他人外表的普遍做法,通常被认为是道德上的麻烦。但是什么时候,为什么会有道德问题呢?我认为,在许多情况下,日常的外貌歧视是错误的,因为它涉及道德上令人反感的外貌歧视。我考虑了日常外貌歧视可能在道德上令人反感的各个方面,因为它涉及错误的歧视行为。我认为,这些行为是错误的,当它们有辱人格,或者当它们产生不公正的后果时,无论是单独的还是累积的。它们可能在许多方面产生不公正的后果。首先,这些行为所依据的表面规范可能存在偏见,以致于这些行为有助于造成利益和负担的不公正分配。其次,这些行为结合起来,可能会损害受害者的个人自主权,或助长这种情况,从而使日常的外貌歧视变得压抑。第三,就其影响而言,这些行为可能是不公正的有害行为。
{"title":"What’s wrong with everyday lookism?","authors":"Andrew Mason","doi":"10.1177/1470594X20982051","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1470594X20982051","url":null,"abstract":"Everyday lookism, by which I mean the widespread practice of commenting upon and judging the appearance of others, is often regarded as morally troubling. But when, and why, is it morally problematic? I argue that in many cases everyday lookism is wrongful because it involves morally objectionable appearance discrimination. I consider various respects in which everyday lookism can be morally objectionable in virtue of the acts of wrongful discrimination it involves. I argue that these acts are wrongful when they are demeaning, or when they have unjust consequences whether singly or cumulatively. There are a number of ways in which they may have unjust consequences. First, the appearance norms in which these acts are rooted may be biased in such a way that the acts contribute to creating an unjust distribution of benefits and burdens. Second, these acts may combine to make everyday lookism oppressive in virtue of impairing the personal autonomy of its victims or contributing to doing so. Third, these acts may be unjustly harmful in terms of their effects.","PeriodicalId":45971,"journal":{"name":"Politics Philosophy & Economics","volume":"22 1","pages":"315 - 335"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80235549","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8
Dealing fairly with trade imbalances in monetary unions 公平处理货币联盟的贸易不平衡
IF 0.9 2区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS Pub Date : 2021-02-01 DOI: 10.1177/1470594X21992005
Marco Meyer
Politicians around the globe wrangle about how to deal with trade imbalances. In the Eurozone, members running a trade deficit accuse members running a surplus of forcing them into deficit. Yet political philosophers have largely overlooked issues of justice related to trade imbalances. I address three such issues. First, what, if anything, is wrong with trade imbalances? I argue that in monetary unions, trade imbalances can lead to domination between member states. Second, who should bear the burden of rebalancing trade? I argue that surplus and deficit countries should share that burden. The current situation placing the burden squarely on deficit countries is unjust. Third, which institutional arrangements should monetary unions adopt to regulate trade balances? Monetary unions can either reduce trade imbalances within the monetary union, neutralise the impact of trade imbalances on the economic sovereignty of member states, or delegate economic policy affecting trade balances to a legitimate supranational institution. The Eurozone must adopt one of these options to prevent member states from domination. Which option protects members best against domination depends on what makes interference between members arbitrary, an unresolved question in republican theories of justice.
全球的政治家们就如何解决贸易失衡问题争论不休。在欧元区,出现贸易逆差的成员国指责贸易顺差的成员国迫使它们出现逆差。然而,政治哲学家在很大程度上忽视了与贸易失衡相关的正义问题。我提出了三个这样的问题。首先,贸易失衡有什么问题(如果有的话)?我认为,在货币联盟中,贸易失衡可能导致成员国之间的支配。第二,谁应该承担贸易再平衡的重担?我认为,盈余国家和赤字国家应分担这一负担。目前把负担完全放在赤字国家身上是不公平的。第三,货币联盟应该采用哪些制度安排来调节贸易平衡?货币联盟可以减少货币联盟内部的贸易不平衡,抵消贸易不平衡对成员国经济主权的影响,或者将影响贸易平衡的经济政策委托给合法的超国家机构。欧元区必须采取其中一种选择,以防止成员国占据主导地位。哪种选择能最好地保护成员免受统治,取决于是什么让成员之间的干涉变得武断,这是共和正义理论中一个悬而未决的问题。
{"title":"Dealing fairly with trade imbalances in monetary unions","authors":"Marco Meyer","doi":"10.1177/1470594X21992005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1470594X21992005","url":null,"abstract":"Politicians around the globe wrangle about how to deal with trade imbalances. In the Eurozone, members running a trade deficit accuse members running a surplus of forcing them into deficit. Yet political philosophers have largely overlooked issues of justice related to trade imbalances. I address three such issues. First, what, if anything, is wrong with trade imbalances? I argue that in monetary unions, trade imbalances can lead to domination between member states. Second, who should bear the burden of rebalancing trade? I argue that surplus and deficit countries should share that burden. The current situation placing the burden squarely on deficit countries is unjust. Third, which institutional arrangements should monetary unions adopt to regulate trade balances? Monetary unions can either reduce trade imbalances within the monetary union, neutralise the impact of trade imbalances on the economic sovereignty of member states, or delegate economic policy affecting trade balances to a legitimate supranational institution. The Eurozone must adopt one of these options to prevent member states from domination. Which option protects members best against domination depends on what makes interference between members arbitrary, an unresolved question in republican theories of justice.","PeriodicalId":45971,"journal":{"name":"Politics Philosophy & Economics","volume":"50 1","pages":"45 - 66"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89877268","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
In memory of Jerry Gaus (1952–2020) 纪念杰里·高斯(1952-2020)
IF 0.9 2区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS Pub Date : 2020-11-01 DOI: 10.1177/1470594x20970679
{"title":"In memory of Jerry Gaus (1952–2020)","authors":"","doi":"10.1177/1470594x20970679","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1470594x20970679","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45971,"journal":{"name":"Politics Philosophy & Economics","volume":"65 1","pages":"317 - 320"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2020-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"91031655","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
期刊
Politics Philosophy & Economics
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
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
×
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
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