Out-Kanting  Rawls:  An  Argument  for Responsibility-Sensitive Theories of Justice from an Autonomy-Based Account of Normativity

TEUN J. DEKKER

首页> 外文期刊>Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review/Revue canadienne de philosophie >Out-Kanting Rawls: An Argument for Responsibility-Sensitive Theories of Justice from an Autonomy-Based Account of Normativity

【24h】

Out-Kanting Rawls: An Argument for Responsibility-Sensitive Theories of Justice from an Autonomy-Based Account of Normativity

机译：超越康特·罗尔斯：基于自治的规范性论证对责任敏感的正义论证

获取原文

获取原文并翻译 | 示例

掌桥外文数据库（机构版） >>

开具论文收录证明 >>

文献代查 >>

页面导航

摘要
著录项
相似文献
相关主题

摘要

When considering normative concepts, such as distributive justice, one nmust consider both the question how concepts can have normative force and which nparticular conceptions of these concepts have this normative force. In this article I nconsider the view that the human capacity for autonomy accounts for normativity, and nargue that adopting this view commits one to a responsibility-sensitive theory of dis-ntributive justice. This conclusion puts me directly at odds with the work of John Rawls, nwho derives his responsibility-insensitive difference principle from a similar account of nautonomy. However, I argue that such an argument would be based on a mischarac-nterisation of what is signiﬁ cant about the human capacity for autonomy.

机译：在考虑诸如分配正义之类的规范性概念时，必须考虑以下两个问题：概念如何具有规范性，以及这些概念中哪些特定的概念具有规范性。在本文中，我考虑了一种观点，即人类的自主能力是规范性的考虑因素，而采用这种观点的说法则是一种对责任感敏感的分配正义理论。这个结论使我直接与约翰·罗尔斯（John Rawls）的工作背道而驰，约翰·罗尔斯（John Rawls）从类似的非自治理论中得出了他的责任不敏感差异原则。但是，我认为这样的论点是基于对人类自主能力的重要意义的误判。

著录项

来源
《Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review/Revue canadienne de philosophie》 |2009年第2期|p.353-372|共20页
作者
TEUN J. DEKKER;
展开▼
作者单位

University College Maastricht - Maastricht University ,;

展开▼
收录信息
原文格式 PDF
正文语种 eng
中图分类
关键词

相似文献

外文文献
中文文献
专利

1. A SATISFACTORY MINIMUM CONCEPTION OF JUSTICE: RECONSIDERING RAWLS'S MAXIMIN ARGUMENT [J] . Alexander Kaufman Economics & philosophy . 2013,第3期

机译：公正的最小理念：代表拉兹的最大论点
2. A Fair Accord: Cradle to Cradle as a Design Theory Measured against John Rawls’ Theory of Justice and Immanuel Kant’s Categorical Imperative [J] . Cyrille Gijbels, Jacob Voorthuis Sustainability . 2010,第1期

机译：公平的协议：从摇篮到摇篮作为对约翰·罗尔斯的正义论和依曼纽尔·康德的绝对命令的衡量
3. One Justice or Two? A Model of Reconciliation of Normative Justice Theories and Empirical Research on Organizational Justice [J] . Natalia Cuguero-Escofet, Marion Fortin Journal of Business Ethics . 2014,第3期

机译：一两个法官？规范正义理论的和解模型与组织正义的实证研究
4. Thoughts about the Recruitment Tests in the Planned Settlement of Demobilized Military Officers-Based on the Theory of Justice of John Rawls [C] . Xue Bo, Xue Yan, Li Yongkang International Conference on Public Management . 2012

机译：基于约翰罗尔斯司法理论，对复员军官计划解决中的招聘试验的思考
5. The bounds of justice: Rawls on global justice and international obligation (John Rawls). [D] . Song, Edward Hokeun Kim. 2005

机译：正义的界限：关于全球正义和国际义务的罗尔斯（John Rawls）。
6. On the prospect of an experimental account of argumentation. Commentary: Toward an experimental account of argumentation: the case of the slippery slope and the ad hominem arguments [O] . John Ian K. Boongaling -1

机译：关于实验论证的前景。评论：对论证的实验性说明：滑坡和特例论证的情况
7. Justice, equality, disability: A reflection from "the capabilities approach" and the theory of justice of John Rawls [O] . Torres Hugo Fabián, Córdova Molina Diego 2014

机译：正义，平等，残疾：来自“能力方法”和约翰·罗尔斯的正义理论的反思
8. Remarks on (a) Towards a Normative Theory of Organization Design Control and (b) A Game Theoretic Account of Social Justice [R] . Lewis, A. A. 1980

机译：关于（a）建立组织设计控制的规范性理论和（b）社会正义的博弈理论的评论

Out-Kanting Rawls: An Argument for Responsibility-Sensitive Theories of Justice from an Autonomy-Based Account of Normativity

摘要

著录项

相似文献

相关主题

期刊订阅