Must Theorising about Adaptive Preferences Deny Women's Agency?

Journal of Applied Philosophy 29 (4):302-317 (2012)
Authors
Serene J. Khader
CUNY Graduate Center
Abstract
Critics argue that adaptive preference theorists misrepresent oppressed people's reasons for perpetuating their oppression. According to critics, AP theorists assume that people who adapt their preferences to unjust conditions lack the psychic capacities that would allow them to develop their own normative perspectives and/or form appropriate values. The misrepresentation is morally problematic, because it promotes unjustified paternalism and perpetuates colonial stereotypes of third‐world women. I argue that we can imagine a conception of AP that is consistent with acknowledging agency in people who perpetuate their oppression. I offer a weak perfectionist conception of AP that is consistent with recognising agentic capacities in the oppressed. On my conception, APs are preferences incompatible with an agent's basic wellbeing that formed under unjust conditions — and that an agent would reverse upon exposure to better conditions. My conception encourages respectful treatment of the oppressed without requiring us to abandon the feminist political goals the notion of AP is meant to serve. It helps us identify real‐world preferences that are problematically adapted to oppressive conditions and offers an account of why they seem not to be women's ‘true preferences’
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/j.1468-5930.2012.00575.x
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 34,925
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

The Perfectionism of Nussbaum's Adaptive Preferences.Rosa Terlazzo - 2014 - Journal of Global Ethics 10 (2):183-198.

View all 6 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

In Defense of Adaptive Preferences.Donald W. Bruckner - 2009 - Philosophical Studies 142 (3):307 - 324.
Agency Without Autonomy: Valuational Agency.Ranjoo Seodu Herr - 2010 - Journal of Global Ethics 6 (3):239-254.
Adaptive Preferences and the Hellenistic Insight.Hugh Breakey - 2010 - Australian Journal of Professional and Applied Ethics 12 (1):29-39.
Knowing Their Own Good: Preferences & Liberty in Global Ethics.Lisa L. Fuller - 2011 - In Thom Brooks (ed.), New Waves in Ethics. Palgrave MacMillan. pp. 210--230.
Loose Women, Lecherous Men: A Feminist Philosophy of Sex.Linda Lemoncheck - 1998 - Philosophical Studies 89 (2-3):369-373.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2012-10-11

Total downloads
39 ( #158,887 of 2,272,769 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
6 ( #69,184 of 2,272,769 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature