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
[...]
TL;DR: The phenomenon we know as authority is expressed most starkly in transactions similar to the following: one of them stands before another, moving its limbs or producing some sounds, and the other responds apparently quite as the first expected as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: On a stray planet in an out-of-the-way corner of the universe live odd beings with patterns of behavior odder still. It can be frequently observed that one of them stands before another, moving its limbs or producing some sounds, and the other responds apparently quite as the first expected. But why? Why should these feeble motions have such force? This puzzle or wonder is presented to us conspicuously in the phenomenon we know as authority. Authority is exercised most starkly in transactions similar to the following:
53 citations
Book•
01 Jan 2016
TL;DR: In this paper, a policy review synthesises the main findings from several European projects dealing with migration and compares them with key insights from the wider research literature on migration and with policy documents.
Abstract: This policy review synthesises the main findings from several European projects dealing with migration. Where possible, these findings are matched, or occasionally contrasted, with key insights from the wider research literature on migration and with policy documents. An introductory chapter sets the scene with regard to the ongoing European debate on migration and gives some basic facts and figures. Chapter 2, the first of three substantive chapters, presents research related to the two-way interaction between policies and flows, with a focus on regular migration. Chapter 3 tackles the complex issue of migrants’ integration from a variety of perspectives – economic, social, cultural, spatial and political. Chapter 4 explores the migration – development nexus, and specifically the potential of migration for stimulating development in migrants’ countries of origin. A concluding chapter highlights key findings and policy implications. The title of this report ‘Migration: Facing Realities and Maximising Opportunities’ indicates its main narrative arc. The challenges and dilemmas posed by migration have to be faced in a way which is both principled and pragmatic. Wherever and whenever possible, these challenges and realities should be ‘turned’ into a scenario where the potential benefits of migration are maximised for all actors concerned
53 citations
01 Jan 2012
TL;DR: In this paper, gender differences in distributive justice by means of a controllable laboratory experiment were investigated in a dictator game with production, in which subject first solve a quiz to accumulate earnings and then divide the surplus by choosing one of the following allocations: (1) keeping the entire surplus (the selfish allocation), (2) giving the entire budget away, (3) dividing the surplus in two identical parts (the egalitarian allocation), or (4) assigning the surplus according to the subject's performance in the quiz, or (5) according to subjects' production, which
Abstract: This paper investigates gender differences in distributive justice by means of a
controlled laboratory experiment I consider a dictator game with production, in which
subjects first solve a quiz to accumulate earnings and then divide the surplus by
choosing one of the following allocations: (1) keeping the entire surplus (the selfish
allocation), (2) giving the entire surplus away, (3) dividing the surplus in two identical
parts (the egalitarian allocation), (4) dividing the surplus according to the subject's
performance in the quiz (the accountability allocation), or (5) dividing the surplus
according to subjects' production, which is due to performance and circumstances (the
libertarian allocation) I find that women and men have different performance in the quiz
but do not choose a different criteria when dividing the surplus The data suggest,
however, that women's are more sensitive to the context as women's allocation choices
depend on whether they have earned more or less money than their counterparts It is
also found that women are more likely to employ the fair allocation that most benefits
their financial payoff, whereas this is not the case for men
53 citations
Cites background from "Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pl..."
...Lastly, the data in this paper also shed light on fairness as a context-specific phenomenon (Walzer, 1983; Young, 1994)....
[...]
01 Apr 2020
TL;DR: For 50 years, educator and sociologist Geoff Whitty resolutely pursued social justice through education, first as a classroom teacher and ultimately as the Director of the Institute of Education in London as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: For 50 years, educator and sociologist Geoff Whitty resolutely pursued social justice through education, first as a classroom teacher and ultimately as the Director of the Institute of Education in London.
The essays in this volume - written by some of the most influential authors in the sociology of education and critical policy studies - take Whitty’s work as the starting point from which to examine key contemporary issues in education and the challenges to social justice that they present. Set within three themes of knowledge, policy and practice in education, the chapters tackle the issues of defining and accessing ‘legitimate’ knowledge, the changing nature of education policy under neoliberalism and globalization, and the reshaping of teacher workplaces and professionalism – as well as attempts to realize more emancipatory practice. Whitty’s scholarship on what constitutes quality and impact in educational research is also explored.
Together, the essays open a window on a life in the sociology of education, the scholarly community of which it was part, and the facets of education policy, practice and research that they continue to reveal and challenge in pursuit of social justice. They celebrate Whitty as one of the foremost sociologists of education of his generation, but also as a friend and colleague. And they highlight the continued relevance of his contribution to those seeking to promote fairer and more inclusive education systems.
52 citations
01 Jan 2013
TL;DR: In this paper, a sociological critique of compatibilist metaphysics is presented, which is based on the notion of mutual attribution of responsibility and the universality of the belief in free will.
Abstract: Most contemporary political philosophies are underpinned by compatibilist metaphysics (which combines ontological determinism with practical free will). The present research is a sociological critique of its two major premises. The first premise defends the normative priority of democracy over philosophy: lay opinion enjoys full legitimacy to state what is feasible and what is not regarding principles of justice. The second premise is empirical and claims the universality of the belief in free will. The examination of this second premise begins with the acknowledgement of the limits of a moral sociology based on the mutual attribution of responsibility. From there, the program of a critical moral sociology is defined anew as aiming at the explanation of the social mechanisms that universalize the belief in free will and in responsibility. A quantitative study follows, comparing that belief as held by students in management with that of students in philosophy and with that of students in sociology. What emerges is that the contagion of some aspects of that belief is related to their social usefulness: part of that belief objectively stems from a dominant social position, yet it is subjectively perceived as its initial cause. It therefore appears that the injunction to moral responsibility attribution, as a mediator of legitimation of the established order, is much less the result of a "psychologizing neoliberal governmentality" than that of the functioning of any hierarchical social structure as a perpetual engine of production of inequalities. The true psychologization is that which, through the injunction to narcissistic display, increases an alleged need for social recognition, by disguising the demand that one conform to the dominant model as an invitation to being different from it, by turning an individual's narcissism into a most highly valued quality and, in the end, by strengthening the belief in the capacity of self-determination. Together, these two injunctions take part in the institution of free will.
52 citations