Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 16 (2):369-391 (2013)
Thomas Pogge has argued that typical citizens of affluent nations participate in an unjust global order that harms the global poor. This supports his conclusion that there are widespread negative institutional duties to reform the global order. I defend Pogge’s negative duty approach, but argue that his formulation of these duties is ambiguous between two possible readings, only one of which is properly confined to genuinely negative duties. I argue that this ambiguity leads him to shift illicitly between negative and positive duties, and ultimately to overstate the extent of the negative ones. I also argue that recognition of this ambiguity makes it possible to draw a meaningful distinction between the relevant positive and negative duties, and that Pogge’s analysis can therefore be revised in a way that reveals substantial negative institutional duties to the global poor, albeit less extensive ones than Pogge asserts. In order to demonstrate this, I discuss two aspects of the global order that Pogge has criticized: the system of intellectual property rights in pharmaceuticals and the rights of de facto rulers to dispose of a nation’s natural resources. In each case, although I do not specify the relevant negative institutional duties precisely, I try to identify intelligible questions whose answers would reveal genuinely negative duties and show that their likely answers are distinct from the conclusions asserted by Pogge and suggested by his analysis
|Keywords||Global poverty Negative duties Harm Institutional duties Thomas Pogge|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
Basic Rights: Subsistence, Affluence, and U.S. Foreign Policy.Henry Shue - 1980 - Princeton University Press.
Living High and Letting Die: Our Illusion of Innocence.Peter K. Unger - 1996 - Oxford University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Rigorist Cosmopolitanism A Kantian Alternative to Pogge.S. Nili - 2013 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 12 (3):260-287.
Why "We" Are Not Harming the Global Poor: A Critique of Pogge's Leap From State to Individual Responsibility.Uwe Steinhoff - 2012 - Public Reason 4 (1-2):119-138.
The Duty to Eradicate Global Poverty: Positive or Negative?Pablo Gilabert - 2005 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 7 (5):537-550.
Comentarios Sobre la Concepcion de la Justicia Global de Pogge.Pablo Gilabert - 2007 - Revista Latinoamericana de Filosofia 33 (2):205-222.
Poverty, Negative Duties and the Global Institutional Order.Magnus Reitberger - 2008 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 7 (4):379-402.
Punishing States That Cause Global Poverty.Thom Brooks - 2007 - William Mitchell Law Review 33 (2):519-32.
Basic Positive Duties of Justice and Narveson's Libertarian Challenge.Pablo Gilabert - 2006 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 44 (2):193-216.
The Feasible Alternatives Thesis: Kicking Away the Livelihoods of the Global Poor.Christian Barry & Gerhard Øverland - 2012 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 11 (1):97-119.
Severe Poverty as a Violation of Negative Duties.Thomas Pogge - 2005 - Ethics and International Affairs 19 (1):55–83.
From Global Poverty to Global Equality: A Philosophical Exploration.Pablo Gilabert - 2012 - Oxford University Press, UK.
Do We Owe the Global Poor Assistance or Rectification?Mathias Risse - 2005 - Ethics and International Affairs 19 (1):9–18.
Added to index2012-02-28
Total downloads187 ( #23,727 of 2,169,723 )
Recent downloads (6 months)38 ( #7,125 of 2,169,723 )
How can I increase my downloads?