Sociological Theory 22 (3):432-444 (2004)
|Abstract||Past applications of Jasso's theory of justice evaluation, including several applied tests, generally support the theory but raise questions future applications should address. These include whether the theory might predict as well or better if the good in question is something other than income and if it would predict third-party evaluations as well or better than first-party evaluations. Moreover, the theory could be used for more demanding applications: interventions, which would involve changing the situation in order to affect justice evaluations. The theory itself suggests three means of effecting such interventions|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Boudewijn de Bruin (2005). Game Theory in Philosophy. Topoi 24 (2):197-208.
Bradford Skow (2012). Why Does Time Pass? Noûs 46 (2):223-242.
Peter Aczel, David Israel, Yosuhiro Katagiri & Stanley Peters (eds.) (1993). Situation Theory and its Applications Vol. Csli.
Boudewijn De Bruin (2005). Game Theory in Philosophy. Topoi 24 (2):197-208.
Jon Barwise, Jean Mark Gawron, Gordon Plotkin & Syun Tutiya (eds.) (1991). Situation Theory and its Applications Vol. Csli.
Robin Cooper, Kuniaki Mukai & John Perry (eds.) (1990). Situation Theory and its Applications Vol. Csli.
Kenny Easwaran (2010). Logic and Probability. Journal of the Indian Council of Philosophical Research 27 (2):229-253.
David Ellerman (2010). Inalienable Rights: A Litmus Test for Liberal Theories of Justice. Law and Philosophy 29 (Sept.):571-599.
Guillermina Jasso (2000). Some of Robert K. Merton's Contributions to Justice Theory. Sociological Theory 18 (2):331-339.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads1 ( #274,507 of 548,977 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?