This category needs an editor. We encourage you to help if you are qualified.
Volunteer, or read more about what this involves.
Related categories
Siblings:
27 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Order:
  1. Samuel Arnold (2011). The Difference Principle at Work. Journal of Political Philosophy 20 (1):94-118.
  2. Thom Brooks & Martha C. Nussbaum (eds.) (2015). Rawls's Political Liberalism. Cup.
    Widely hailed as one of the most significant works in modern political philosophy, John Rawls's _Political Liberalism_ defended a powerful vision of society that respects reasonable ways of life, both religious and secular. These core values have never been more critical as anxiety grows over political and religious difference and new restrictions are placed on peaceful protest and individual expression. This anthology of original essays suggests new, groundbreaking applications of Rawls's work in multiple disciplines and contexts. Thom Brooks, Martha Nussbaum, (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  3. Sem de Maagt (2014). In Defence of Fact-Dependency. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 44 (3-4):443-462.
    G.A. Cohen and David Estlund claim that, because of their fact-dependent nature, constructivist theories of justice do not qualify as moral theories about fundamental values such as justice. In this paper, I defend fact-dependent, constructivist theories of justice against this fact-independency critique. I argue that constructivists can invoke facts among the grounds for accepting fundamental principles of justice while maintaining that the foundation of morality has to be non-empirical. My claim is that constructivists ultimately account for the normativity of fact-dependent (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  4. William A. Edmundson, Fair Value and Ownership of the Means of Production.
    John Rawls argued that welfare-state capitalism would be rejected in a constitutional convention called to implement the principles of justice chosen in the original position. But neither property-owning democracy nor liberal democratic socialism could be ruled out. Property-owning democracy allows private ownership of major productive assets, while liberal democratic socialism does not. Rawls came to rely on the first-principle guarantee of the fair value of political liberty in his defense of the difference principle. Bur fair value lays the basis for (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  5. Luca Ferrero (1995). Il Principio di Differenza: Incentivi o Uguaglianza? Philosophy and Public Issues - Filosofia E Questioni Pubbliche 1:47-63.
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  6. Paul Fryfogle (2013). Defense of Rawls: A Reply to Brock. Res Cogitans 4 (1):181-188.
    Cosmopolitans like Gillian Brock, Charles Beitz, and Thomas Pogge argue that the principles of justice selected and arranged in lexical priority in Rawls’ first original position would—and should for the same reasons as in the first—also be selected in Rawls’ second original position. After all, the argument goes, what reasons other than morally arbitrary ones do we have for selecting a second set of principles? A different, though undoubtedly related, point of contention is the cosmopolitan charge that Rawls fails to (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  7. Ludwig Heider & Nikil Mukerji (2016). Rawls, Order Ethics, and Rawlsian Order Ethics. In Christoph Luetge & Nikil Mukerji (eds.), Order Ethics: An Ethical Framework for the Social Market Economy. Springer 149-166.
    This chapter discusses how order ethics relates to the theory of justice. We focus on John Rawls's influential conception "Justice as Fairness" (JF) and compare its components with relevant aspects of the order-ethical approach. The two theories, we argue, are surprisingly compatible in various respects. We also analyse how far order ethicists disagree with Rawls and why. The main source of disagreement that we identify lies in a thesis that is central to the order ethical system, viz. the requirement of (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  8. D. Clayton Hubin (1980). Minimizing Maximin. Philosophical Studies 37 (4):363 - 372.
    In A Theory of Justice, John Rawls provides several arguments contractors in the original position using maximin reasoning, which leads directly to the difference principle. These arguments are inadequate to support the claim that maximin reasoning is the uniquely rational approach to choice in the original position.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  9. Kyle Johannsen (2016). Cohen's Equivocal Attack on Rawls's Basic Structure Restriction. Ethical Perspectives 23 (3):499-525.
    G.A. Cohen is famous for his critique of John Rawls’s view that principles of justice are restricted in scope to institutional structures. In recent work, however, Cohen has suggested that Rawlsians get more than just the scope of justice wrong: they get the concept wrong too. He claims that justice is a fundamental value, i.e. a moral input in our deliberations about the content of action-guiding regulatory principles, rather than the output. I argue here that Cohen’s arguments for extending the (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  10. Carl Knight (2014). Theories of Distributive Justice and Post-Apartheid South Africa. Politikon 41 (1):23-38.
    South Africa is a highly distributively unequal country, and its inequality continues to be largely along racial lines. Such circumstances call for assessment from the perspective of contemporary theories of distributive justice. Three such theories—Rawlsian justice, utilitarianism, and luck egalitarianism—are described and applied. Rawls' difference principle recommends that the worst off be made as well as they can be, a standard which South Africa clearly falls short of. Utilitarianism recommends the maximization of overall societal well-being, a goal which South Africa (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  11. Carl Knight (2008). A Pluralistic Approach to Global Poverty. Review of International Studies 34 (4):713-33.
    A large proportion of humankind today lives in avoidable poverty. This article examines whether affluent individuals and governments have moral duties to change this situation. It is maintained that an alternative to the familiar accounts of transdomestic distributive justice and personal ethics put forward by writers such as Peter Singer, John Rawls, and Thomas Pogge is required, since each of these accounts fails to reflect the full range of relevant considerations. A better account would give some weight to overall utility, (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  12. Christoph Luetge & Nikil Mukerji (eds.) (2016). Order Ethics: An Ethical Framework for the Social Market Economy. Springer.
    This book examines the theoretical foundations of order ethics and discusses business ethics problems from an order ethics perspective. Order ethics focuses on the social order and the institutional environment in which individuals interact. It is a well-established paradigm in European business ethics. The book contains articles written by leading experts in the field and provides both a concise introduction to order ethics and short summary articles homing in on specific aspects of the order-ethical paradigm. It presents contributions describing fundamental (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  13. Douglas Mackay (2016). Incentive Inequalities and Freedom of Occupational Choice. Economics and Philosophy 32 (1):21-49.
    In Rescuing Justice and Equality, G.A. Cohen argues that the incentive inequalities permitted by John Rawls's difference principle are unjust since people cannot justify them to their fellow citizens. I argue that citizens of a Rawlsian society can justify their acceptance of a wide range of incentive inequalities to their fellow citizens. They can do so because they possess the right to freedom of occupational choice, and are permitted – as a matter of justice – to exercise this right by (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  14. Michael Moehler (2010). The (Stabilized) Nash Bargaining Solution as a Principle of Distributive Justice. Utilitas 22 (4):447-473.
    It is argued that the Nash bargaining solution cannot serve as a principle of distributive justice because (i) it cannot secure stable cooperation in repeated interactions and (ii) it cannot capture our moral intuitions concerning distributive questions. In this article, I propose a solution to the first problem by amending the Nash bargaining solution so that it can maintain stable cooperation among rational bargainers. I call the resulting principle the stabilized Nash bargaining solution. The principle defends justice in the form (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   19 citations  
  15. Nikil Mukerji (2009). Das Differenzprinzip von John Rawls Und Seine Realisierungsbedingungen. Lit.
    John Rawls' Differenzprinzip verlangt, die gesellschaftlichen Spielregeln zum größten Vorteil der sozial Schwächsten einzurichten. Der vorliegende Band analysiert, was diese sozialethische Maxime realiter erfordert und erklärt, wie sie moralphilosophisch begründet werden kann. Dabei wird betont, dass die faktische Realisierbarkeit ethischer Prinzipien eine Bedingung ihrer normativen Geltung darstellt. Und es wird eine Interpretation des Differenzprinzips vorgestellt, die eine Umsetzung der Rawlsschen Idee auch unter realen gesellschaftlichen Bedingungen ermöglicht.
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  16. Mark Navin (2010). Rescuing Justice and Equality. Journal of Moral Philosophy 7 (3):411-413.
    G. A. Cohen wanted to rescue justice and equality from John Rawls and his followers. In this, his final book, Cohen presents a clear, focused, and all-together powerful attack on the Rawlsian approach to political philosophy and distributive justice.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  17. Martin O'Neill (2008). Three Rawlsian Routes Towards Economic Democracy. Revue de Philosophie Économique 9 (1):29-55.
    This paper addresses ways of arguing fors ome form of economic democracy from within a broadly Rawlsian framework. Firstly, one can argue that a right to participate in economic decision-making should be added to the Rawlsian list of basic liberties, protected by the first principle of justice. Secondly,I argue that a society which institutes forms of economic democracy will be more likely to preserve a stable and just basic structure over time, by virtue of the effects of economic democratization on (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  18. Carlos Pérez-Garzón (2013). El trasplante de los principios de justicia de John Rawls en la Constitución colombiana de 1991 y su aplicación por la Corte Constitucional en la sentencia T-406 de 1992. Revista Justicia y Derecho 1 (2):8-19.
    This short essay tries to answer the question: were the John Rawls’ principles of justice transplanted into the Colombian Constitution of 1991, and if it is so, have they ever been applied by a judge in Colombia? The answer is affirmative: both principles have been transplanted into the 13TH article of the Constitution, and the second one has been used by the Constitutional Court in the judgment T-406 of 1992 in order to protect the disadvantaged’s social rights through the acción (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  19. Carlos Pérez-Garzón (2013). The Transplant of John Rawls' Principles of Justice Into the Colombian Constitution of 1991 and Their Influence to Overcome the Traditional Legal Formalism in Colombia. Revista Justicia y Derecho 1 (2):20-26.
    This essay wants to show that the main elements of the John Rawls’ principles of justice were transplanted into the Colombian Constitution of 1991, and that they have been used by the Constitutional Court, especially the second principle, as an instrument to overcome the legal formalism traditionally practiced by the Colombian Judiciary, and to protect more effectively both fundamental and social rights.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  20. David Rondel (2010). Review of G.A. Cohen's Rescuing Justice and Equality. Review of Metaphysics 64 (1):137-139.
  21. Max Seeger (2011). A Critique of the Incentives Argument for Inequalities. Kriterion: Journal of Philosophy 25 (1):40-52.
    According to the incentives argument, inequalities in material goods are justifiable if they are to the benefit of the worst off members of society. In this paper, I point out what is easily overlooked, namely that inequalities are justifiable only if they are to the overall benefit of the worst off, that is, in terms of both material and social goods. I then address the question how gains in material goods can be weighed against probable losses in social goods. The (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  22. Attila Tanyi (2007). Rawls különbözeti elve (Rawls’ Difference Principle). Hungarian Review of Political Science (Politikatudomanyi Szemle) 16 (2):125-150.
    This paper deals with the third and most disputed principle of John Rawls’s theory of justice: the so-called difference principle. My reasoning has three parts. I first present and examine the principle. My investigation is driven by three questions: what considerations lead Rawls to the acceptance of the principle; what the principle’s relation to effectiveness is; and what and how much the principle demands. A proper understanding of the principle permits me to spend the second half of the paper with (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  23. Attila Tanyi (2000). Piac és igazságosság? (Market and Justice?). Napvilág.
    The aim of the book is to uncover the relation between market and justice through the critical examination of the work of Friedrich Hayek. The book argues for the following thesis: the institution of free market is not the only candidate social system; substantial, not merely formal distributive justice must become the central virtue of our social institutions. Notwithstanding its achievements and virtues, the Hayekian theory makes a simple mistake by equivocating possible social systems, dividing them into two groups. One (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  24. Paul Voice (1999). Rawls's Difference Principle and a Problem of Sacrifice. In Henry R. Richardson Paul J. Weithman (ed.), The Two Principles and their Justifications. 28-35.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  25. Jeppe von Platz (2016). Social Cooperation and Basic Economic Rights: A Rawlsian Route to Social Democracy. Journal of Social Philosophy 47 (3):288-308.
    The central idea of Rawls’s theory of justice is the idea of democratic society as a fair system of cooperation between free and equal citizens. The moral powers of democratic citizens are the capacities presupposed by this idea. Rawls identifies two such powers, the capacity for a conception of the good and the capacity for a sense of justice. I argue that the idea of democratic citizenship presupposes also a third moral power: the capacity for working. Since the basic rights (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  26. Alex Voorhoeve (2003). The House That Jack Built. The Philosophers' Magazine 22 (22):28-31.
    A critical overview of John ('Jack') Rawls' key ideas.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  27. Nicholas Vrousalis (2015). The Political Philosophy of G. A. Cohen. Bloomsbury Academic.