{"title":"社会等级制度有什么问题?在Niko Kolodny的《The Pecking Order》中","authors":"Daniel Sharp","doi":"10.1007/s10677-023-10427-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This review critically assesses Niko Kolodny’s theory of social hierarchy and its importance as articulated in <i>The Pecking Order</i> (2023). After summarizing Kolodny’s argument, I raise two critical challenges. First, I ask whether Kolodny leaves us without adequate account of why social hierarchies are, in themselves, objectionable. Second, I query whether Kolodny’s defense of representative democracy is decisive, and suggest that egalitarians should be open to alternative ways of mitigating the threat of hierarchy posed by political rule.</p>","PeriodicalId":47052,"journal":{"name":"Ethical Theory and Moral Practice","volume":"30 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What’s Wrong with Social Hierarchy? On Niko Kolodny’s The Pecking Order\",\"authors\":\"Daniel Sharp\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10677-023-10427-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>This review critically assesses Niko Kolodny’s theory of social hierarchy and its importance as articulated in <i>The Pecking Order</i> (2023). After summarizing Kolodny’s argument, I raise two critical challenges. First, I ask whether Kolodny leaves us without adequate account of why social hierarchies are, in themselves, objectionable. Second, I query whether Kolodny’s defense of representative democracy is decisive, and suggest that egalitarians should be open to alternative ways of mitigating the threat of hierarchy posed by political rule.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47052,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ethical Theory and Moral Practice\",\"volume\":\"30 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ethical Theory and Moral Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-023-10427-8\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethical Theory and Moral Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-023-10427-8","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
What’s Wrong with Social Hierarchy? On Niko Kolodny’s The Pecking Order
This review critically assesses Niko Kolodny’s theory of social hierarchy and its importance as articulated in The Pecking Order (2023). After summarizing Kolodny’s argument, I raise two critical challenges. First, I ask whether Kolodny leaves us without adequate account of why social hierarchies are, in themselves, objectionable. Second, I query whether Kolodny’s defense of representative democracy is decisive, and suggest that egalitarians should be open to alternative ways of mitigating the threat of hierarchy posed by political rule.
期刊介绍：
Ethical Theory and Moral Practice is a double-anonymous peer-reviewed philosophical journal which aims to publish the best work produced in all fields of practical philosophy. It welcomes high-quality, rigorous and original, submissions regardless of the traditions or schools of thought from which they derive. As an editorial priority, however, published papers should be accessible to the philosophical community at large and as free as possible of unnecessary jargon.
Ethical Theory and Moral Practice publishes work on ethical theories that address practical problems, as well as work that presents or examines empirical findings regarding moral practices relevant for ethical theorizing. The journal therefore actively seeks to promote cross-fertilization across areas of practical philosophy—such as moral, political, legal, and social philosophy—and more empirical disciplines, such as medicine, economics, sociology, political science, and psychology. It welcomes work in applied ethics provided that it can offer theoretical or normative contributions to larger philosophical debates. The journal also considers historically-oriented contributions provided they are not mainly exegetical and can offer insights for current debates in practical philosophy.
The journal endorses the BPA/ SWIP-UK Good Practice for Journals. Further details are available in our Review Policy document.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
