Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-jr42d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T10:38:00.742Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cosmopolitan Impartiality and Patriotic Partiality

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2020

Kok-Chor Tan
Get access

Extract

Cosmopolitanism, as a moral idea, holds that individuals are the ultimate units of moral worth and are entitled to equal consideration, regardless of contingencies such as citizenship or nationality. In one common interpretation, cosmopolitan justice not only regards individuals as the basic subjects of moral concern, but it also requires distributive principles to transcend national affiliations and to apply equally to all persons of the world. As Simon Caney puts it, “persons’ entitlements should not be determined by factors such as their nationality or citizenship.“

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Philosophy Supplementary Volume , Volume 31: Global Justice, Global Institutions , 2005 , pp. 165 - 192
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Benedict, Anderson. Imagined Community. New Left Books: London, 1983.Google Scholar
Brian, Barry. Justice as Impartiality. Oxford University Press: Oxford, 1995.Google Scholar
Beitz, C. “Cosmopolitan Ideal and National Sentiment.” Journal of Philosophy 80 (1983): 591–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beitz, C.. Political Theory and International Relations, 2nd ed. Princeton University Press: Princeton, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beitz, C. “Social and Cosmopolitan Liberalism.” International Affairs 75 (1999): 515-29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beitz, C. “International Liberalism and Distributive Justice: A Survey of Recent Thought.” World Politics 51 (1999): 269-96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, Caney “International Distributive Justice.” Political Studies 49 (2001): 974-97.Google Scholar
Simon, CaneyDavid, Jones and Peter, George eds. National Rights and International Obligations. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1996.Google Scholar
Cunningham, Frank. The Real World of Democracy Revisited. Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press, 1994.Google Scholar
Ronald, Dworkin. Law's 's Empire.‘ Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1986.Google Scholar
Ronald, Dworkin “Liberal Community.” In Communitarianism and Individualism, ed. Avineri, Shiomo and de-Shalit, AvnerOxford: Oxford University Press, 1992. Previously published in California Law Review, 1989.Google Scholar
Ronald, Dworkin “To Each His Own: Review of Michael Walzer's Spheres of Justice.“ New York Review of Books, April 14 (1983): 4–6.Google Scholar
Frankena, W. K.. Ethics, 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1973.Google Scholar
Friedman, M.. What Are Friends For? Feminist Perspectives on Personal Relationships and Moral Theory. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1993.Google Scholar
Gewirth, A. “Ethical Universalism and Ethical Particularism.” Journal of Philosophy 85 (1988): 292-93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodin, R.. Protecting the Vulnerable. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1985.Google Scholar
Goodin, R. “What Is So Special about Our Fellow Countryman?” Ethics 98 (1988): 663-86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herman, B. “On the Value of Acting from the Motive of Duty.” Philosophical Review 67 (1981): 233-50.Google Scholar
Hurka, T. “The Justification of National Partiality.” In The Morality of Nationalism , ed. McKim, R. and McMahan, J.Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.Google Scholar
Jones, C.. Global Justice: Defending Cosmopolitanism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999.Google Scholar
Kelly, E. “Personal Concern.” Canadian Journal of Philosophy 30 (2000): 115-36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Will, Kymlicka and Wayne, Norman “The Return of the Citizen.” Ethics 104 (1994): 352-81.Google Scholar
Will, Kymlicka. Politics in the Vernacular. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.Google Scholar
Mason, A. “Special Obligations to Compatriots.” Ethics 107 (1997): 427-47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
David, Miller “The Ethical Significance of Nationality.” Ethics 98 (1988): 647-62.Google Scholar
David, Miller “The Limits of Cosmopolitan Justice.” In International Society ed. Mapel, D. and Nardin, T.Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1999.Google Scholar
David, Miller. On Nationality. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995.Google Scholar
Miller, R. “Cosmopolitan Respect and Patriotic Concern.” Philosophy and Public Affairs 27 (1998): 202-24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nagel, T.. Equality and Partiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991.Google Scholar
Martha, Nussbaum “Patriotism and Cosmopolitanism.” In For Love of Country , ed. Cohen, J.Boston: Beacon Press, 1996.Google Scholar
O'Neill, O.. Bounds of lustice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.Google Scholar
Thomas, Pogge “The Bounds of Nationalism.” In Rethinking Nationalism, ed. Couture, J.Nielsen, K. and Seymour, M.Calgary: University of Calgary Press, 1998.Google Scholar
Thomas, Pogge. Realizing Rawls. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1989.Google Scholar
Peter, Railton “Alienation, Consequentialism, and the Demands of Morality.“ In Consequentialism and its Critics, ed. Scheffler, S.Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988.Google Scholar
John, Rawls. The Law of Peoples. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1971.Google Scholar
John, Rawls. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999.Google Scholar
Sandel, M.. Democracy's 's Discontent. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1996.Google Scholar
Debra, Satz “Equality of What Among Whom?” In Global Justice, ed. Shapiro and Brilmayer. New York: New York University Press, 1999.Google Scholar
Scheffler, S. ed. Consequentialism and its Critics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988.Google Scholar
Scheffler, S. “Liberalism, Nationalism, and Egalitarianism.” In The Morality of Nationalism , ed. McKim, R. and McMahan, J.Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.Google Scholar
Schlereth, T.. The Cosmopolitan Ideal in Enlightenment Thought. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1977.Google Scholar
Shue, H.. Basic Rights, 2nd ed. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996.Google Scholar
Shue, H. “Eroding Sovereignty: The Advance of Principle.” In The Morality of Nationalism, ed. McKim, R. and McMahan, J.Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997Google Scholar
Simmons, J. A. “Associative Political Obligations.” Ethics 106 (1996): 247-73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tamir, Y.. Liberal Nationalism. Princeton University Press, 1992.Google Scholar
Tan, K.-C. “Critical Notice of Rawls's The Law of Peoples.“ Canadian Journal of Philosophy 31 (2001): 113-32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michael, Walzer. Spheres of Justice. New York: Basic Books, 1983.Google Scholar
Daniel, Weinstock “National Partiality: Confronting the Intuitions.” The Monist 82 (1999): 516-47.Google Scholar
Whitting, J. “Impersonal Friends.” The Monist 74 (1991): 3–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar