Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pluralism and Equality
TL;DR: Lawler as mentioned in this paper argued that being for the freeze means that one is not for disarmament, which is hardly a rational position in the sense that it is suspect if not immoral, in the eyes of some.
Abstract: that a plurality of the American Catholic bishops endorse a nuclear freeze (p. 4), saying that they are thus "taking their stance with Moscow,55 which is for a freeze, and not with the Vatican, which "is still in favor of disarmament?not a freeze.55 To make any sense at all, Mr. Lawler must mean that being for the freeze means that one is not for disarmament? hardly a rational position. One recalls here the arguments, during the 19305s and 19405s, that being for racial justice in the United States was suspect if not immoral, in the eyes of some, because the communists also favored it.
Citations
More filters
Posted Content•
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors argue that corporations transgress all the basic dichotomies that structure liberal treatments of law, economics, and politics: public/private, government/market, privilege/equality, and status/contract.
Abstract: This article challenges the liberal, contractual theory of the corporation and argues for replacing it with a political theory of the corporation. Corporations are government-like in their powers, and government grants them both their external “personhood” and their internal governing authority. They are thus not simply private. Yet they are privately organized and financed and therefore not simply public. Corporations transgress all the basic dichotomies that structure liberal treatments of law, economics, and politics: public/private, government/market, privilege/equality, and status/contract. They are “franchise governments” that cannot be satisfactorily assimilated to liberalism. The liberal effort to assimilate them, treating them as contractually constituted associations of private property owners, endows them with rights they ought not have, exacerbates their irresponsibility, and compromises their principal public benefit of generating long-term growth. Instead, corporations need to be placed in a distinct category — neither public nor private, but “corporate” — to be regulated by distinct rules and norms.
169 citations
TL;DR: It is argued that the ultimate aim of all empirical ethics is to improve the context-sensitivity of ethics, and it is shown that in some kinds of meta-ethical theories, there is an intrinsic need for connecting normative ethics with empirical social research.
Abstract: In medical ethics, business ethics, and some branches of political philosophy (multi-culturalism, issues of just allocation, and equitable distribution) the literature increasingly combines insights from ethics and the social sciences. Some authors in medical ethics even speak of a new phase in the history of ethics, hailing "empirical ethics" as a logical next step in the development of practical ethics after the turn to "applied ethics." The name empirical ethics is ill-chosen because of its associations with "descriptive ethics." Unlike descriptive ethics, however, empirical ethics aims to be both descriptive and normative. The first question on which I focus is what kind of empirical research is used by empirical ethics and for which purposes. I argue that the ultimate aim of all empirical ethics is to improve the context-sensitivity of ethics. The second question is whether empirical ethics is essentially connected with specific positions in meta-ethics. I show that in some kinds of meta-ethical theories, which I categorize as broad contextualist theories, there is an intrinsic need for connecting normative ethics with empirical social research. But context-sensitivity is a goal that can be aimed for from any meta-ethical position.
168 citations
TL;DR: This paper found that individuals tend to use all or most of these principles simultaneously in making distributive justice judgments, but that they weigh them differently according to various factors, and that women and men use and weigh differently This paper.
Abstract: efficiency-under a condition of impartiality. Our experiments are designed to investigate these principles and to determine how independent factors influence how individuals use them. We find that individuals tend to use all or most of these principles simultaneously in making distributive justice judgments, but that they weigh them differently according to various factors. In particular, we find an expectedly strong difference between how women and men use and weigh
167 citations
TL;DR: The status of international law and transnational legal agreements with respect to the sovereignty claims of liberal democracies has become a highly contentious theoretical and political issue as discussed by the authors, and there is increasing reticence on the part of many that prospects of a world constitution are neither desirable nor salutary.
Abstract: The status of international law and transnational legal agreements with respect to the sovereignty claims of liberal democracies has become a highly contentious theoretical and political issue. Although recent European discussions focus on global constitutionalism, there is increasing reticence on the part of many that prospects of a world constitution are neither desirable nor salutary. This article more closely considers criticisms of these legal transformations by distinguishing the nationalist from democratic sovereigntiste positions, and both, from diagnoses that see the universalization of human rights norms either as the Trojan horse of a global empire or as neocolonialist intentions to assert imperial control over the world. These critics ignore “the jurisgenerativity of law.” Although democratic sovereigntistes are wrong in minimizing how human rights norms improve democratic self-rule; global constitutionalists are also wrong in minimizing the extent to which cosmopolitan norms require local contextualization, interpretation, and vernacularization by self-governing peoples.
167 citations
TL;DR: For both comparative and normative purposes, we need to study not merely the citizenship traditions, laws and policies of states considered separately, but rather as part of intertwined citizenship constellations as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: The papers in this special issue of JEMS illustrate how the field of citizenship studies is moving towards a much more systematic comparative approach. They also indicate that the gap between political and legal branches might be narrowing. This brief concluding contribution reflects on a perspective that goes beyond the currently dominant framework, without replacing it. For both comparative and normative purposes, we need to study not merely the citizenship traditions, laws and policies of states considered separately, but rather as part of intertwined citizenship constellations.
163 citations
Cites background from "Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pl..."
...While immigrants have no right to be admitted to the territory, once admitted they must therefore be set on the road to citizenship (Walzer 1983)....
[...]