Values, Rights, and Justice

1
Values, Rights, and Justice
2
GDJ demands a distribution of X according to some
principles of justice

• What is X?
• What is the object of distribution?
• What is important? (for a good human life?
• What resources?

3
Rawls answer a thin theory of value (liberal)

• The Aristotelian principle each human being
  should develop his/her personality/potential
• primary goods (liberty and opportunity, income
  and wealth, bases of self-respect) necessary
  means to realise ones life plan

4
Critique of a thin theoryAmartya Sen and Martha
Nussbaum

• 1. Neo-classical economic theory BNP/Capita,
  says nothing about level of
• education
• employment
• health
• equality

5
Critique from Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum

• A theory of capabilities
• Necessary means for any human beings development
  and flourishing
• Capability represents freedom, whereas primary
  goods tell us only about the means to freedom
• health, education, work, liberty, influence,
  community

6
UNDPHuman Development Index

• Composite measure of three dimensions of human
  development life expectancy (health) adult
  literacy (education) purchasing power (standard
  of living)
• But not democracy, equality, environment

7
(No Transcript)
8
Capabilities (health, education) rights (valid
claims)

• Rights imply duties
• 1. Duties not to prevent P to have access to
  rights
• 2. Duties to protect Ps rights
• 3. Duties to enforce Ps rights

9
Whos duties?

• anyone who has the power
• nations,
• global organisations,
• corporations

10
Argument against the idea of global
redistribution

• Does not take effort and ambition into
  consideration, for example
• luxury consumption or huge military budgets
• elites in poor countries line their pockets
• If the theory is not sensitive to efforts the
  persons own choice will not matter.

11
Thomas Nagels objection

• there are strong moral reasons for the demand of
  global justice, but
• the wealthy nations also have legitimate reasons
  to resist a radical drop in the standard of
  living as a consequence of an implementation of
  principles of global justice

12

• Is it really possible to realise global justice?
• Is it not just a utopian dream?

13
Rawls, 1999

• While realization is, of course, not unimportant,
  I believe that the very possibility of such a
  social order can itself reconcile us to the
  social world. The possibility is not a mere
  logical possibility, but one that connects with
  the deep tendencies and inclinations of the
  social world. For as long as we believe for good
  reasons that a self-sustaining and reasonable
  just political and social order both at home and
  abroad is possible, we can reasonably hope that
  we or others will someday, somewhere, achieve it
  and we can then do something towards this
  achievement. This alone, quite apart from our
  success or failure, suffices to banish the
  dangers of resignation and cynicism