Utilitas 8 (03):263- (2009)
|Abstract||There can be no doubt that Brian Barry has made an enormous contribution to the clarification of the ideas of justice current in contemporary political thought. In Barry’s Justice as Impartiality he explicitly distinguishes and sets in competition three models of justice: justice as mutual advantage; justice as reciprocity; and justice as impartiality (the ‘rational’, ‘fair’ and ‘reasonable’ of my title), and he argues that we should prefer the last of these. What I want to do here is to consider four questions. First, what is this competition a competition about? Second, has Barry adequately characterised the contenders? Third, can the competition be won on the grounds Barry suggests? Fourth, is it a competition that we should want to be won by a single theory? By contrast I want to argue that there are advantages in retaining a pluralist perspective in which all three approaches remain in play|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Sylvia Burrow (2001). Reasonable Moral Psychology and the Kantian Ace in the Hole. Social Philosophy Today 17:37-55.
Larry A. Alexander (1985). Fair Equality of Opportunity. Philosophy Research Archives 11:197-208.
Ian Hunt (2011). Why Justice Matters. Philosophical Papers 38 (2):157-181.
Robert Sugden (1991). Impartiality and Mutual Advantage:Theories of Justice, Vol. 1 of A Treatise on Social Justice. Brian Barry. Ethics 101 (3):634-.
Brian M. Barry (1995). Justice as Impartiality. Oxford University Press.
Robert Garner (2012). Much Ado About Nothing?: Barry, Justice and Animals. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 15 (3):363-376.
Johannes Giesinger (2011). Education, Fair Competition, and Concern for the Worst Off. Educational Theory 61 (1):41-54.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads63 ( #17,811 of 722,863 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #17,024 of 722,863 )
How can I increase my downloads?