Critical remarks on Simon Caney's humanity- centered approach to global justice

Julian Culp

Resumo


The practice-independent approach to theorizing justice (PIA) holds that the social practices to which a particular conception of justice is meant to apply are of no importance for the justification of such a conception. In this paper I argue that this approach to theorizing justice is incompatible with the method of reflective equilibrium (MRE) because the MRE is antithetical to a clean separation between issues of justification and application. In particular I will be maintaining that this incompatibility renders Simon Caney’s cosmopolitan theory of global justice inconsistent, because Caney claims to endorse both a humanity-centered PIA and the MRE.


Palavras-chave


Simon Caney; Method of Reflective Equilibrium; Humanity; Justice; Practice-dependence; John Rawls

Texto completo:

PDF/A

Referências


Banai, Ayelet, Miriam Ronzoni, and Christian Schemmel. 2011. ‘Global Social Justice.’ In Ayelet Banai, Miriam Ronzoni, and Christian Schemmel (eds), Social Justice, Global Dynamics. London: Routledge, 46–60.

Beitz, Charles. 1983. ‘Cosmopolitan Ideals and National Sentiment.’ Journal of Philosophy, 80 (10), 591–600.

Beitz, Charles. 2000. ‘Rawls’s Law of Peoples.’ Ethics, 110 (4), 669–96.

Buchanan, Allen. 1990. ‘Justice as Reciprocity versus Subject-Centered Justice.’ Philosophy and Public Affairs, 19 (3), 227–52.

Buchanan, Allen. 2000. ‘The Law of Peoples: Rules for a Bygone Westphalian Order.’ Ethics, 110 (4), 697–721.

Buchanan, Allen. 2004. Justice, Legitimacy and Self-Determination. New York: Oxford University Press.

Caney, Simon. 2005. Justice Beyond Borders. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Caney, Simon. 2006. ‘Cosmopolitan Justice and Institutional Design: An Egalitarian Liberal Conception of Global Governance.’ Social Theory and Practice, 32, 725–56.

Caney, Simon. 2011. ‘Humanity, Associations and Global Justice: A Defence of Humanity-Centred Cosmopolitan Egalitarianism.’ The Monist, 94 (4), 506–34.

Cohen, G. A. 2008. Rescuing Justice and Equality. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

Daniels, Norman. 1979. ‘Wide Reflective Equilibrium and Theory Acceptance in Ethics.’ Journal of Philosophy 76 (5), 256–82.

Daniels, Norman. 1996. Justice and Justification. Reflective Equilibrium in Theory and Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Daniels, Norman. 2011. ‘The Method of Reflective Equilibrium.’ In Edward Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Ethics. http://plato.stanford.edu/ (home page). Accessed November 14, 2012.

Frankfurt, Harry. 1987. ‘Equality as Moral Ideal.’ Ethics 98, 21-43.

Freeman, Samuel. 2006. ‘Distributive Justice and the Law of Peoples.’ In Rex Martin and David Reidy (eds), The Law of Peoples: A Realistic Utopia? Malden: Blackwell, 243–59.

Freeman, Samuel. 2007. ‘The Law of Peoples, Social Cooperation, Human Rights and Distributive Justice.’ In Samuel Freeman, Essays in Rawlsian Political Philosophy. New York: Oxford University Press, 259–95.

Goodman, Nelson. 1955. Fact, Fiction and Forecast. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

Gunther, Klaus. 1993. The Sense of Appropriateness. Application Discourses in Morality and Law. Albany: SUNY Press.

Honneth, Axel. 2014. Freedom’s Right. The Social Foundations of Democratic Life. New York: Columbia University Press.

James, Aaron. 2005. ‘Constructing Justice for Existing Practice: Rawls and the Status Quo.’ Philosophy and Public Affairs, 33 (3), 281–316.

Ibsen, Malte. 2013. ‘Global Justice and Two Versions of Practice Dependence.’ Raisons Politiques 51 (3), 81-96.

Iser, Mattias. 2016. Indignation and Progress. Foundations of a Critical Theory of Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Jubb, Robert. 2014. ‘“Recover it from the Facts as we Know Them”: Practice-Dependence's Predecessors.’ Journal of Moral Philosophy. 1–23.

Nozick, Robert. 1974. Anarchy, State and Utopia. New York: Basic Books.

Parfit, Derek. 1997. ‘Equality and Priority.’ Ratio 10 (3), 202–21.

Pogge, Thomas. 2004a. ‘The Incoherence of Rawls’s Two Theories of Justice.’ Fordham Law Review, 72 (5), 1739–59.

Pogge, Thomas. 2006. ‘Do Rawls’s Two Theories of Justice Fit Together?’ In Rex Martin and David Reidy (eds), Rawls’s Law of Peoples: A Realistic Utopia? Malden: Blackwell, 206–25.

Rawls, John. 1951. Outline of a Decision Procedure for Ethics. Philosophical Review 60 (2),177–197.

Rawls, John. 1971. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

Rawls, John. 1974. ‘The Independence of Moral Theory.’ Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association 47: 5–22.

Rawls, John. 1999a. The Law of Peoples. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

Rawls, John. 2001. Justice as Fairness. Erin Kelly (ed.). Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

Rawls, John. 2005 [1993]. Political Liberalism. Expanded Edition. New York: Columbia University Press.

Richards, David. 1982. ‘International Distributive Justice.’ In J. Roland Pennock and John W. Chapman (eds), Nomos 24: Ethics, Economics, and the Law. New York: New York University Press, 275–99.

Rodrik, Dani. 2011. ‘The Future of Economic Convergence.’ National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 17400. http://www.nber.org/papers/w17400.pdf

Sangiovanni, Andrea. 2007. ‘Global Justice, Reciprocity, and the State.’ Philosophy and Public Affairs, 35 (1), 3–39.

Sangiovanni, Andrea. 2008. ‘The Priority of Politics over Morality.’ Journal of Political Philosophy, 16 (2), 137–64.

Tan, Kok-Chor. 2004. Justice Without Borders. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wenar, Leif. 2004. ‘The Unity of Rawls’s Work.’ Journal of Moral Philosophy, 1 (3), 265–75.

Williams, Huw-Lloyd. 2012. Rawls, Development and Global Justice. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.5007/1677-2954.2016v15n1p50

 

 

 

 

 

ethic@. Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, SC, Brasil, eISSN 1677-2954

Licença Creative Commons
This obra is licensed under a  Creative Commons Atribuição-NãoComercial-SemDerivações 4.0 Internacional