I am most grateful to Elizabeth Anderson (2000), Philip Pettit (2000) and Thomas Scanlon (2000) for making such insightful and penetrating comments on my work and the related literature. I have reason enough to be happy, having been powerfully defended in some respects and engagingly challenged in others. I must also take this opportunity of thanking Martha Nussbaum, for not only chairing the session in which these papers were presented followed by a splendid discussion (which she led), but also for (...) taking the initiative, in the first place, to arrange the session. (shrink)
An attempt is made to introduce the concept of magnetic moment and magnetic induction directly from observed mechanical interactions between magnets, without bringing in the idealized notion of isolated magnetic poles.
Este artículo trata de las comparaciones ordinales de desigualdad de bienestar y su uso en los juicios de bienestar social, especialmente en el contexto del "principio de diferencia" de Rawls. En la sección 1 se desarrolla el concepto de comparaciones de desigualdad ordinales y se presenta un teorema sobre las comparaciones de desigualdad de bienestar para problemas de distribución. La sección 2 se dedicaa la discusión de Harsanyi (1955) de que la preocupación por reducir las desigualdades de bienestar entre las (...) personas no debe interferir en los juicios de bienestar social. En la sección 3 se presenta una derivación axiomática de la regla lexicográfica maximin de Rawls; ésta se relaciona directamente con los resultados establecidos por Hammond (1975), d'Aspremont y Gevers (1975), y Strasnick (1975). En la última sección se examinan los axiomas usados y se analizan algunos axiomas alternativos con la intención de llegar a una evaluación crítica del enfoque de Rawls de los juicios sobre el bienestar social. (shrink)
The paper examines problems for rationality and morality arising out of prisoners' dilemma. Section I criticizes a k sen's attempt to elimate, By variations of preference patterns, The clash between individual rationality and individual or social optimality. Section ii rejects sen's account of morality as a moral ordering of preferences over outcomes, Because it fails to resolve the conflict raised by prisoners' dilemma between individual and social optimality and creates a new conflict between rationality and individual optimality. Section iii sketches (...) accounts of morality and rationality which can avoid these problems. An appendix further explains the distinctions between four kinds of preferences introduced in the paper itself. (shrink)
This book offers a novel account of the relationship of experience to knowledge. The account builds on the intuitive idea that our ordinary perceptual judgments are not autonomous, that an interdependence obtains between our view of the world and our perceptual judgments. Anil Gupta shows in this important study that this interdependence is the key to a satisfactory account of experience. He uses tools from logic and the philosophy of language to argue that his account of experience makes available (...) an attractive and feasible empiricism. (shrink)
This volume reprints eight of Anil Gupta's essays, some with additional material. The essays bring a refreshing new perspective to central issues in philosophical logic, philosophy of language, and epistemology. Gupta argues that logical interdependence is legitimate, and that it provides a key to understanding a variety of topics of interest to philosophers--including truth, rationality, and experience. The essays are highly accessible and provide a good introduction to ideas Gupta has been developing over the last three decades.
First published in 1973, this book presents a systematic treatment of the conceptual framework as well as the practical problems of measurement of inequality. Alternative approaches are evaluated in terms of their philosophical assumptions, economic content, and statistical requirements. -/- In a new introduction, Amartya Sen, jointly with James Foster, critically surveys the literature that followed the publication of this book, and also evaluates the main analytical issues in the appraisal of economic inequality and poverty.
Translate to English
Amartya Sen (2009). Response. In Reiko Gotoh & Paul Dumouchel (eds.), Against Injustice: The New Economics of Amartya Sen. Cambridge University Press.score: 60.0
Two central issues for ethical analysis of equality are: (1) Why equality? (2) Equality of what? The two questions are distinct but thoroughly interdependent, We cannot begin to defend or criticize equality without knowing what on earth we are talking about, i,e., equality of what features (e,g., incomes, wealths, opportunities, achievements, freedoms, rights)? We cannot possibly answer the first question without addressing the second, That seems obvious enough.
This paper is about three distinct but interrelated problems: (1) the role 0f rights in moral theory, (2) thc characterization 0f agent relative values and their admissibility in consequ<—:ncc—bascd evaluation, and ( 3) the nature 0f moral evaluation 0f states 0f aihirs.
Personal identity and social identity are two very different concepts and the idea of getting them together, as Bhikhu Parekh proposes, within an integrated bundle of some `overall identity' raises serious questions of coherence. Personal identity demands the `sameness' of a person (Who is this guy? Am I still the same person that I was ten years ago?). Social identity is focused instead on our social affiliations, such as identifying with others with, say, the same nationality, or the same religion, (...) or same political partnership. We can make reasoned choices about our priorities in social affiliation. Those who want to make our social affiliation a matter of `discovery' rather than of choice may frighten us by saying that we would lose our overall identity if we were to choose to affiliate differently (for example as an Indian and not just as a Hindu, or as British and not just as a Muslim). To understand that there is no threat to personal identity involved in such choices is important both for clarity of analysis and for standing up against the herd behaviour of identity politics. (shrink)
It is a great privilege for me to be present at the launch of the Report on Making Infrastructure Work for the Poor prepared by the UNDP in collaboration with the Japanese Government. We have had high expectations about this forthcoming report, given the quality of the work that the UNDP has continued to produce (and the quality and dedication of the Poverty Group led now by Dr. Selim Jahan), and given the visionary commitment of the Japanese Government on developmental (...) issues, led - in this case - by JICA. Our expectations are not disappointed - a number of ideas and assessments of older theses can be found in the studies that lie.. (shrink)
Corporate social responsibility (CSR) continues to gain attention atop the corporate agenda and is by now an important component of the dialogue between companies and their stakeholders. Nevertheless, there is still little guidance as to how companies can implement CSR activity in order to maximize returns to CSR investment. Theorists have identified many company-favoring outcomes of CSR; yet there is a dearth of research on the psychological mechanisms that drive stakeholder responses to CSR activity. Borrowing from the literatures on meansend (...) chains and relationship marketing, we propose a conceptual model that explains how CSR provides individual stakeholders with numerous benefits (functional, psychosocial, and values) and how the type and extent to which a stakeholder derives these benefits from CSR initiatives influences the quality of the relationship between the stakeholder and the company. The paper discusses the implications of these insights and highlights a number of areas for future research. (shrink)
I am embarrassed at being placed in the dizzying company of one of the truly great thinkers in the world. The similarities between Mill's ideas and mine partly reflect, of course, his influence on my thinking. But I also discuss some difficulties in taking Mill's whole theory without modification, since there are internal tensions within it. In a paper I published in 1967, I tried to discuss how Mill's willingness to hold on to some contrary positions depended on the nature (...) of his empirical reading of the world. I draw on that diagnosis in commenting on some of the articles here. There are some serious issues of misinterpretation in one of the articles, which I try to clarify. I also comment on Arrow's interpretation of what is involved in the idea of autonomy and on his own way of assessing freedom, and acknowledge the seriousness of the questions he raises about the value of freedom in normative political philosophy. (shrink)