Rawls' Theory of Justice

Scanlon, William; Thomas, M'Balia

doi:10.2307/3311280

Cited by 78 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…10). 4 Slične prijedloge o globalnoj primjeni Rawlsova načela razlike iznijeli su Thomas Scanlon (1985) i Thomas Pogge (1989). 5 Ideja da egalitarna distributivna pravednost pretpostavlja postojanje "zajedničkih simpatija" prisutna je i kod Rawlsa ("pravo naroda polazi od potrebe za zajedničkim simpatijama, neovisno o tome kakav bi mogao biti njihov izvor", Rawls, 2004, str.…”

Section: Zaključakunclassified

Global Poverty and International Distributive Justice

Jolić

2013

Drustvena istrazivanja

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Globalno siromaštvo jedan je od najtrajnijih problema u međunarodnim odnosima. Postoji niz dobro razrađenih teorija u politologiji i političkoj filozofiji koje razmatraju ovaj problem. Zagovornici kozmopolitskih teorija međunarodne distributivne pravednosti smatraju da su naše dužnosti prema globalno siromašnima iste kao prema siromašnima u našim domaćim društvima. U prvom dijelu članka upozoravamo na neke slabosti jedne varijante ovoga pristupa. U drugom dijelu članka branimo Rawlsov pristup međunarodnoj distributivnoj pravednosti, prema kojemu imamo dužnost pomoći opterećenim društvima da uspostave pravedne institucije koje mogu štititi temeljna ljudska prava vlastita stanovništva. Ova dužnost pomoći dopunjena je dvjema dodatnim mjerama kako bi se odgovorilo na hitnost problema globalnoga siromaštva.Ključne riječi: globalno siromaštvo, distributivna pravednost, ljudska prava, načelo razlike Tvrtko Jolić, Institut za filozofiju, Ulica grada Vukovara 54/IV, 10 000 Zagreb, Hrvatska. E-mail: tvrtko@ifzg.hr Distribucija materijalnih dobara predmet je intenzivne rasprave unutar političke filozofije i političke teorije. Unatoč brojnim razlikama između pojedinih teorija distributivne pravednosti, sve one donedavno su dijelile zajedničku pretpostavku, prema kojoj se i ono što se distribuira -bez obzira na to bili to resursi, primarna dobra, blagostanje, sposobnosti ili moguć-nosti -i oni kojima se distribuira nalaze unutar istoga društva. Štoviše, John Rawls u uvodnom dijelu svoje knjige A Theory of 713

show abstract

Section: Zaključakunclassified

Global Poverty and International Distributive Justice

Jolić

2013

Drustvena istrazivanja

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is quite possible that the links of interdependence cross borders. Indeed, very many political philosophers (like Beitz, 1999a; Moellendorf, 2002; O'Neill, 1996; Pogge, 1989; 2002; Scanlon, 1985, p. 202; Young, 2000) have drawn on exactly this model and derived from it cosmopolitan conclusions about the scope of distributive justice. 14…”

Section: Objectionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Global Distributive Justice and the State

Caney

2008

Political Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many hold that the state has normative significance because its borders define the scope of egalitarian principles of distributive justice. On this view egalitarian principles of distributive justice should be applied within the state but should not be adopted at the global level. This article examines two reasons for accepting this view and for rejecting global egalitarianism, and finds both wanting. It then presents three challenges to any view that holds that the scope of principles of distributive justice should be determined by the boundaries of the state. It concludes by noting four distinct ways in which the state has normative significance, each of which can be endorsed by global egalitarians.

show abstract

“…[35] The closely related leximin strategy maximizes the condition of the worst off group (or, alternatively, person), then maximizes the condition of the next worse off group (or person), and so on. [36] The radical priority to the worse off granted by leximinism may be restrained by some kind of utilitarian or other maximising principle, such that the commitments to the worse off and to the overall good are both conditional. This limited priority strategy would imply that, though an improvement for the worse off is always more weighty than an equivalent improvement for the better off, a minor gain for the worse off may be outweighed by a larger gain for the better off.…”

Section: Application To Prioritarianismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Describing Equality

Knight

2008

Law and Philos

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rawls' Theory of Justice

Cited by 78 publications

References 0 publications

Global Poverty and International Distributive Justice

Global Poverty and International Distributive Justice

Global Distributive Justice and the State

Describing Equality

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About