David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Economics and Philosophy 17 (1):1-20 (2001)
In a recent discussion of Amartya Sen's concept of the capabilities of people for functioning in their society – and the idea of targeting people's functioning capabilities in evaluating the society – G. A. Cohen accuses Sen of espousing an inappropriate, ‘athletic’ image of the person (Cohen, 1993, pp. 24–5). The idea is that if Sen's formulations are to be taken at face value, then life is valuable only so far as people actively choose most facets of their existence: if they fare well in the material stakes, for example, they must fare well as a result of active choice and effort, not because anyone else looks after them. ‘That’, says Cohen, ‘overestimates the place of freedom and activity in well-being’ (p. 25).
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
John M. Alexander (2010). Ending the Liberal Hegemony: Republican Freedom and Amartya Sen's Theory of Capabilities. Contemporary Political Theory 9 (1):5.
Geoffrey Hinchliffe (2009). Capability and Deliberation. Studies in Philosophy and Education 28 (5):403-413.
Diana Coole (2010). Ending the Liberal Hegemony: Republican Freedom and Amartya Sen's Theory of Capabilities. Contemporary Political Theory 9 (1):5-24.
Serene J. Khader (2015). Development Ethics, Gender Complementarianism, and Intrahousehold Inequality. Hypatia 30 (2):352-369.
Similar books and articles
Christopher W. Morris (ed.) (2009). Amartya Sen. Cambridge University Press.
Richard J. Arneson, Distributive Justice and Basic Capability Equality: 'Good Enough' is Not Good Enough.
Christian List (2004). The Impossibility of a Paretian Republican? Some Comments on Pettit and Sen. Economics and Philosophy 20 (1):65-87.
Mozaffar Qizilbash (2007). Social Choice and Individual Capabilities. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 6 (2):169-192.
Philip Pettit (2009). Freedom in the Spirit of Sen. In Christopher W. Morris (ed.), Amartya Sen. Cambridge University Press
Harlan Beckley (2002). Capability as Opportunity: How Amartya Sen Revises Equal Opportunity. Journal of Religious Ethics 30 (1):107 - 135.
Douglas A. Hicks (2002). Gender, Discrimination, and Capability: Insights From Amartya Sen. Journal of Religious Ethics 30 (1):137 - 154.
Mozaffar Qizilbash (2006). Capability, Happiness and Adaptation in Sen and J. S. Mill. Utilitas 18 (1):20-32.
Serena Olsaretti (2005). Endorsement and Freedom in Amartya Sen's Capability Approach. Economics and Philosophy 21 (1):89-108.
T. M. Scanlon (2001). Symposium on Amartya Sen's Philosophy: 3 Sen and Consequentialism. Economics and Philosophy 17 (1):39-50.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads95 ( #19,912 of 1,700,408 )
Recent downloads (6 months)11 ( #57,594 of 1,700,408 )
How can I increase my downloads?