Critical remarks on Simon Caney's humanity- centered approach to global justice
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...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina
2016-09-01
|
| Series: | Ethic@: an International Journal for Moral Philosophy |
| Online Access: | https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/ethic/article/view/43126 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | 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.
|
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1677-2954 |