Journal of Global Ethics 7 (3):291-302 (2011)
AbstractThis paper reflects on a critique of cosmopolitanism mounted by Tom Campbell, who argues that cosmopolitans place undue stress on the issue of global justice. Campbell argues that aid for the impoverished needy in the third world, for example, should be given on the Principle of Humanity rather than on the Principle of Justice. This line of thought is also pursued by ?Liberal Nationalists? like Yael Tamir and David Miller. Thomas Nagel makes a similar distinction and questions whether the ideal of justice can even be meaningfully applied on a global scale. The paper explores whether the distinction between the Principle of Humanity and the Principle of Justice might be a false dichotomy in that both principles could be involved in humanitarian assistance. It will suggest that both principles might be grounded in an ethics of caring and that the ethics of caring cannot be so sharply distinguished from the discourse of justice and of rights. As a result, the Principle of Humanity and the Principle of Justice cannot be so sharply distinguished either. It is because we care about others as human beings (Principle of Humanity) that we pursue justice for them (Principle of Justice) and the alleviation of their avoidable suffering.
Similar books and articles
Principles or imagination? Two approaches to global justice.Mark Coeckelbergh - 2007 - Journal of Global Ethics 3 (2):203 – 221.
The Motivation Question: Arguments from Justice, and from Humanity.Holly Lawford-Smith - 2012 - British Journal of Political Science 42:661-678.
Egalitarianism, ideals, and cosmopolitan justice.Gillian Brock - 2005 - Philosophical Forum 36 (1):1–30.
Fair Equality of Opportunity: John Rawls’ (Best) Forgotten Principle.Larry A. Alexander - 1985 - Philosophy Research Archives 11:197-208.
The difference principle, equality of opportunity, and cosmopolitan justice.Gillian Brock - 2005 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 2 (3):333-351.
A Modified Rawlsian Theory of Social Justice: “Justice as fair Rights”.Rodney G. Peffer - 2008 - Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 50:593-608.
The deep structure of confucianism: A social psychological approach.Kwang-Kuo Hwang - 2001 - Asian Philosophy 11 (3):179 – 204.
Ought We to Do What We Ought to Be Made to Do?William A. Edmundson - forthcoming - In Georgios Pavlakos Veronica Rodriguez-Blanco (ed.), Practical Normativity. Essays on Reasons and Intentions in Law and Practical Reason. Cambridge University Press.
Terrorism for Humanity: Inquiries in Political Philosophy.Ted Honderich - 2003 - London: Pluto Press.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
The sentimentalist paradox: on the normative and visual foundations of humanitarianism.Fuyuki Kurasawa - 2013 - Journal of Global Ethics 9 (2):201 - 214.