Nonideal Justice as Nonideal Fairness
| Abstract | This paper provides foundations for the first comprehensive nonideal theory of justice. §1 of this paper argues that whichever ideal theory turns out to be correct – whether ideal justice is fairness, libertarian, pluralist, contextualist, communitarian; etc. – nonideal justice is nonideal fairness. Specifically, §1 shows that literallyevery debate within nonideal theory – debates about war, affirmative action, etc. – is fundamentally a debate about what is fair under unjust conditions. The question then is what “nonideal fairness” is. In order to answer this question, §2 of this paper constructs a new theoretical apparatus: a moral model that (I argue) any ideal theorist can accept, whatever their doctrinal leanings, as a model of nonideal fairness. The model I construct is broadly based upon John Rawls’ “original position.” It is crucial to emphasize “broadly.” I prefer to call the model I construct the “nondenominational NNOP” (or NNOP) because, as we will see, the model can incorporate any ideal theory – for example, libertarian ideals, pluralist ideals, communitarian ideals; etc. – into its very structure, modeling nonideal fairness relative to that theory of ideals. §3 then shows that the parties to the NNOP should aim to obtain several “nonideal primary goods.” Finally, §4 argues that the NNOP generates a General Principle of Nonideal Theory, and five lexically ordered corollary principles, that together comprise a compelling comprehensive nonideal theory of justice – a theory that can be usefully extended to any area of nonideal theory, including the justice of war, affirmative action, etc. | |||||||||
| Keywords | nonideal theory justice fairness | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,875 |
| External links |
  Try with proxy. |
| Through your library | Only published papers are available at libraries |
Similar books and articlesPablo Gilabert (2008). Global Justice and Poverty Relief in Nonideal Circumstances. Social Theory and Practice 34 (3):411-438.
Lisa Tessman (2010). Idealizing Morality. Hypatia 25 (4):797-824.
Robert S. Taylor (2009). Rawlsian Affirmative Action. Ethics 119 (3):476-506.
Paul Weirich (2004). Realistic Decision Theory: Rules for Nonideal Agents in Nonideal Circumstances. OUP USA.
Marcus Arvan (2008). A Nonideal Theory of Justice. Dissertation, University of Arizona
G. Sillari (2007). Review: Realistic Decision Theory: Rules for Nonideal Agents in Nonideal Circumstances. [REVIEW] Mind 116 (462):489-493.
Adam Morton (2005). Review of Paul Weirich, Realistic Decision Theory: Rules for Nonideal Agents in Nonideal Circumstances. [REVIEW] Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews 2005 (8).
David Wiens (forthcoming). Achieving Global Justice: Why Failures Matter More Than Ideals. In Kate Brennan (ed.), Making Global Institutions Work: Power, Accountability and Change. Routledge.
Robert S. Taylor (2012). Hate Speech, the Priority of Liberty, and the Temptations of Nonideal Theory. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 15 (3):353-68.
Lisa Fuller (forthcoming). Burdened Societies and Transitional Justice. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2011-10-28Total downloads22 ( #57,056 of 556,837 )Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #39,010 of 556,837 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
