退出自由主义:人的能力与公共推理

Douglas B. Rasmussen, D. J. Den Uyl
{"title":"退出自由主义:人的能力与公共推理","authors":"Douglas B. Rasmussen, D. J. Den Uyl","doi":"10.2202/1145-6396.1220","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Central to Amartya Sen's understanding and defense of political orders that promote equality is his appeal to human capabilities. However, he fails to provide a basis for their selection, weighting, and value. Moreover, the account of ethical reasoning (“public reasoning\") by which he does attempt to respond to basic challenges is highly problematic. It not only conflicts with a view of human flourishing that is individualized, agent-relative, and self-directed but also offers neither justification for nor principled limitation of state imposed solutions.","PeriodicalId":231500,"journal":{"name":"Journal des �conomistes et des �tudes Humaines","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Retreat from Liberalism: Human Capabilities and Public Reasoning\",\"authors\":\"Douglas B. Rasmussen, D. J. Den Uyl\",\"doi\":\"10.2202/1145-6396.1220\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Central to Amartya Sen's understanding and defense of political orders that promote equality is his appeal to human capabilities. However, he fails to provide a basis for their selection, weighting, and value. Moreover, the account of ethical reasoning (“public reasoning\\\") by which he does attempt to respond to basic challenges is highly problematic. It not only conflicts with a view of human flourishing that is individualized, agent-relative, and self-directed but also offers neither justification for nor principled limitation of state imposed solutions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":231500,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal des �conomistes et des �tudes Humaines\",\"volume\":\"27 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal des �conomistes et des �tudes Humaines\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2202/1145-6396.1220\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal des �conomistes et des �tudes Humaines","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2202/1145-6396.1220","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

阿马蒂亚·森对促进平等的政治秩序的理解和捍卫的核心是他对人类能力的呼吁。然而,他没有提供选择、加权和价值的依据。此外,他试图回应基本挑战的伦理推理(“公共推理”)的描述是非常有问题的。它不仅与个体化、代理相关和自我导向的人类繁荣观相冲突,而且既没有为国家强加的解决方案提供理由,也没有对其进行原则性限制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Retreat from Liberalism: Human Capabilities and Public Reasoning
Central to Amartya Sen's understanding and defense of political orders that promote equality is his appeal to human capabilities. However, he fails to provide a basis for their selection, weighting, and value. Moreover, the account of ethical reasoning (“public reasoning") by which he does attempt to respond to basic challenges is highly problematic. It not only conflicts with a view of human flourishing that is individualized, agent-relative, and self-directed but also offers neither justification for nor principled limitation of state imposed solutions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Hobbes, Rawls, Nussbaum, Buchanan, and All Seven of the Virtues Are Regulators Rational? Richard Whately: Aux Origines de la Catallaxie Economic Freedom and Beauty Pageant Success in the World Economic Freedom and Government: A Conceptual Framework
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1