首页> 外文期刊>Inquiry >Choices, Consequences and Desert
【24h】

Choices, Consequences and Desert

机译:选择,后果和荒漠

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

It is a commonly held position in the literature on distributive justice that choices individuals make from an equalized background may lead to inequalities of outcome. This raises the question of how to assign consequences to particular types of behaviour. Theories of justice based on the concept of moral responsibility offer considerable guidance as to how society should be structured, but they rarely address the question of what the consequences of making a particular choice should be. To fill this lacuna, these theories must rely on a theory of consequences. I argue that the most plausible theories of consequences are substantive rather than procedural in nature. Such theories of consequences are inherently based on the concept of desert. By evaluating individuals' choices society may determine the appropriate consequences of choices for which they are responsible.
机译:在分配正义的文献中,一个普遍的立场是,个人在平等的背景下做出的选择可能导致结果的不平等。这就提出了一个问题,即如何将后果分配给特定的行为类型。基于道德责任概念的正义理论为社会的结构提供了可观的指导,但很少涉及做出特定选择的后果的问题。为了填补这一空白,这些理论必须依靠后果理论。我认为,最合理的后果理论本质上是实质性而非程序性的。这种后果理论固有地基于沙漠的概念。通过评估个人的选择,社会可以确定他们负责的选择的适当结果。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Inquiry》 |2009年第2期|109-126|共18页
  • 作者

    TEUN J. DEKKER;

  • 作者单位

    Maastricht University, University College Maastricht, PO Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands;

  • 收录信息 美国《科学引文索引》(SCI);
  • 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
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号