自由主义与福利国家的艰难关系

Q2 Arts and Humanities Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics Pub Date : 2024-07-09 DOI:10.23941/ejpe.v17i1.778
Harald Borgebund
{"title":"自由主义与福利国家的艰难关系","authors":"Harald Borgebund","doi":"10.23941/ejpe.v17i1.778","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper makes two related points. First, as liberals have started to realize that the welfare state is unable to deliver on egalitarian theories of justice, they have increasingly tried to dissociate their theories from the welfare state. Second, dissociating from the welfare state type of thinking is difficult for some liberal egalitarian theories such as John Rawls's theory of justice as his theory shares some of the same underlying thinking as found in the welfare state. For example, Rawls's understanding of universal citizenship and the difference principle resembles some of the aspects of the welfare state on how social equality and citizenship are tied to productivity and society as a venture of mutual cooperation. Consequently, liberals are caught in a difficult relationship where they can only partially move beyond the welfare state. Because of this affinity liberals should move beyond a Rawlsian framework, as Rawls's theory is difficult to completely dissociate from the welfare state.","PeriodicalId":37914,"journal":{"name":"Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics","volume":"93 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Liberalism’s Difficult Relationship with the Welfare State\",\"authors\":\"Harald Borgebund\",\"doi\":\"10.23941/ejpe.v17i1.778\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper makes two related points. First, as liberals have started to realize that the welfare state is unable to deliver on egalitarian theories of justice, they have increasingly tried to dissociate their theories from the welfare state. Second, dissociating from the welfare state type of thinking is difficult for some liberal egalitarian theories such as John Rawls's theory of justice as his theory shares some of the same underlying thinking as found in the welfare state. For example, Rawls's understanding of universal citizenship and the difference principle resembles some of the aspects of the welfare state on how social equality and citizenship are tied to productivity and society as a venture of mutual cooperation. Consequently, liberals are caught in a difficult relationship where they can only partially move beyond the welfare state. Because of this affinity liberals should move beyond a Rawlsian framework, as Rawls's theory is difficult to completely dissociate from the welfare state.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37914,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics\",\"volume\":\"93 7\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.23941/ejpe.v17i1.778\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23941/ejpe.v17i1.778","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文提出了两个相关的观点。首先,随着自由主义者开始意识到福利国家无法实现平等主义的正义理论,他们越来越多地试图将自己的理论与福利国家分离开来。其次,对于某些自由主义平等主义理论(如约翰-罗尔斯的正义理论)来说,与福利国家类型的思维分离是困难的,因为他的理论与福利国家的一些基本思维相同。例如,罗尔斯对普遍公民权和差异原则的理解与福利国家的某些方面相似,即社会平等和公民权如何与生产力和社会作为相互合作的事业联系在一起。因此,自由主义者陷入了一种困难的关系,他们只能部分地超越福利国家。由于这种亲缘关系,自由主义者应该超越罗尔斯的框架,因为罗尔斯的理论很难与福利国家完全分离。
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
Liberalism’s Difficult Relationship with the Welfare State
This paper makes two related points. First, as liberals have started to realize that the welfare state is unable to deliver on egalitarian theories of justice, they have increasingly tried to dissociate their theories from the welfare state. Second, dissociating from the welfare state type of thinking is difficult for some liberal egalitarian theories such as John Rawls's theory of justice as his theory shares some of the same underlying thinking as found in the welfare state. For example, Rawls's understanding of universal citizenship and the difference principle resembles some of the aspects of the welfare state on how social equality and citizenship are tied to productivity and society as a venture of mutual cooperation. Consequently, liberals are caught in a difficult relationship where they can only partially move beyond the welfare state. Because of this affinity liberals should move beyond a Rawlsian framework, as Rawls's theory is difficult to completely dissociate from the welfare state.
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
Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics
Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: The Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics (EJPE) is a peer-reviewed bi-annual academic journal supported by the Erasmus Institute for Philosophy and Economics at the Erasmus School of Philosophy of Erasmus University Rotterdam. EJPE publishes research on the methodology, history, ethics, and interdisciplinary relations of economics, and welcomes contributions from all scholars with an interest in any of its research domains. EJPE is an Open Access Journal: all the content is permanently available online without subscription or payment. EJPE aims to... -Publish high quality original research on the intersection of philosophy and economics. -Support the inter-disciplinary development of the field with critical survey papers covering ongoing debates and information about relevant publications. -Provide a forum that is friendly to young scholars, and supported by an authoritative, efficient, and constructive review process.
期刊最新文献
Carbon Offsets and Concerns about Shifting Harms: A Reply to Mintz-Woo Review of Stephen Engelmann’s Economic Rationality: What is Political Economy? Cambridge, UK: Polity, 2022, 144 pages. Editorial Note Review of Thomas Nagel’s Moral Feelings, Moral Reality, and Moral Progress. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2023, v + 70 pp. Intergenerational Cooperation and Justice between Age Groups
×
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