Raisons Politiques 51:97-120 (2013)
Authors |
|
Abstract |
In this paper, I make three points. The first is that there is indeed a distinctive approach to moral methodology, different from standard moral reasoning, that can be described as “practice-dependence”. I argue that its distinctness lies in recommending an aptness claim , namely that moral principles for regulating social practices must be principles for better fulfilling the point of those practices, a point discoverable in shared understandings of the practice. Participants treat domestic political societies as having a different point to the practice of international relations. On this approach, then, different moral principles apply in each case: principles of distributive justice between citizens in the former and principles of cooperative fairness between states in the latter. My second point is that this approach fails, however, an important test which I call the justifiability constraint . Any formulation of a moral principle assigning rights and duties, benefits and burdens, to people should be justifiable to those persons by reference to a moral value. Yet, as I show, the practice-dependence view cannot offer any justification based on moral value for the aptness claim. My last point is that both endorsers and critics of practice-dependence have mistakenly attributed this approach to theorists who restrict the scope of justice on the basis of moral justification. Such views are, in fact, incompatible with the aptness claim given that they offer plausible independently derived moral grounds for restricting the scope of justice. They are also compatible with the justifiability constraint. For these reasons, I conclude that practice-dependence is a red herring for debates on global justice.
|
Keywords | practice-dependence human rights global justice |
Categories | (categorize this paper) |
Options |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Download options
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Global Justice and Two Conceptions of Practice-Dependence.Malte Froslee Ibsen - 2013 - Raisons Politiques 51:81-96.
Constructivism and Reflexive Constitution-Making Practices.James Gledhill - 2013 - Raison Politiques 51 (3):63-80.
Social Connection and Practice Dependence: Some Recent Developments in the Global Justice Literature: Iris Marion Young, Responsibility for Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011; and Ayelet Banai, Miriam Ronzoni and Christian Schemmel, Social Justice, Global Dynamics. Oxford: Routledge, 2011.Robert Jubb - 2013 - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 16 (5):1-16.
Do Transnational Economic Effects Violate Human Rights?Saladin Meckled-Garcia - 2009 - Ethics and Global Politics 2 (3):259-276.
The Relevance of Trust for Moral Justification.Theresa Weynand Tobin - 2011 - Social Theory and Practice 37 (4):599-628.
Patriotism and Justice in the Global Dimension. A Conflict of Virtues?Marta Soniewicka - 2011 - Eidos: Revista de Filosofía de la Universidad Del Norte 14:50-71.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2014-07-08
Total views
47 ( #239,021 of 2,499,012 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #210,368 of 2,499,012 )
2014-07-08
Total views
47 ( #239,021 of 2,499,012 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #210,368 of 2,499,012 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads