David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Environmental Ethics 3 (1):55-61 (1981)
Although the participants in the initial situation of justice in John Rawls’ Theory of Justice choose principles of justice only, their choices have implications for other moral concerns. The only check on the self-interest of the participants is that there be unanimous acceptance of the principles. But, since animals are not participants, it is possible that principles will be adopted which confiict with what Rawls calls“duties of compassion and humanity” toward animals. This is a consequence of the initial situation’s assumption that principles of justice can be determined independently of other moral considerations. We question this assumption, and show that satisfactory modifications of Rawls’ initial situation undermine its contractarian basis and require the rejection of exclusively self-interested participants
|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
Ruth Abbey (2007). Rawlsian Resources for Animal Ethics. Ethics and the Environment 12 (1):1-22.
Similar books and articles
Nir Eyal (2005). ‘Perhaps the Most Important Primary Good’: Self-Respect and Rawls’s Principles of Justice. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 4 (2):195-219.
Robert Garner (2012). Rawls, Animals and Justice: New Literature, Same Response. [REVIEW] Res Publica 18 (2):159-172.
Hennie Lötter (1999). Rawls, Young, and the Scope of Justice. Theoria 46 (94):90-107.
Philip Pettit (1974). A Theory of Justice? Theory and Decision 4 (3-4):311-324.
Larry A. Alexander (1985). Fair Equality of Opportunity. Philosophy Research Archives 11:197-208.
Thomas L. Carson (1983). Strict Compliance and Rawls's Critique of Utilitarianism. Theoria 49 (3):142-158.
Henry S. Richardson (2006). Rawlsian Social-Contract Theory and the Severely Disabled. Journal of Ethics 10 (4):419 - 462.
Robert Garner (2012). Much Ado About Nothing?: Barry, Justice and Animals. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 15 (3):363-376.
Daniel A. Dombrowski (1998). Rawls and Animals. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 12 (1):63-77.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads15 ( #171,478 of 1,724,742 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #167,193 of 1,724,742 )
How can I increase my downloads?