私有化及其不满

C. Cordelli
{"title":"私有化及其不满","authors":"C. Cordelli","doi":"10.23943/PRINCETON/9780691205755.003.0002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter provides both the motivational and the philosophical background against which an account of the wrong of privatization is then developed. It clarifies how to understand the concept of a public function and critically assesses existing answers to the question of when and why privatization is morally problematic. It also argues for a different diagnostic approach, which begins with what political institutions are for. The chapter investigates the nature of the disagreement on privatization. It critically examines and partly rejects four dominant approaches to the question of whether, when, and why the privatization of the public is morally objectionable: the distributive, motivational, sociocultural, and essentialist arguments.","PeriodicalId":122906,"journal":{"name":"The Privatized State","volume":"41 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Privatization and Its Discontents\",\"authors\":\"C. Cordelli\",\"doi\":\"10.23943/PRINCETON/9780691205755.003.0002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This chapter provides both the motivational and the philosophical background against which an account of the wrong of privatization is then developed. It clarifies how to understand the concept of a public function and critically assesses existing answers to the question of when and why privatization is morally problematic. It also argues for a different diagnostic approach, which begins with what political institutions are for. The chapter investigates the nature of the disagreement on privatization. It critically examines and partly rejects four dominant approaches to the question of whether, when, and why the privatization of the public is morally objectionable: the distributive, motivational, sociocultural, and essentialist arguments.\",\"PeriodicalId\":122906,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Privatized State\",\"volume\":\"41 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-11-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Privatized State\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.23943/PRINCETON/9780691205755.003.0002\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Privatized State","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23943/PRINCETON/9780691205755.003.0002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本章提供了动机和哲学背景,在此基础上,对私有化的错误进行了阐述。它阐明了如何理解公共职能的概念,并批判性地评估了私有化何时以及为什么在道德上存在问题的现有答案。它还提出了一种不同的诊断方法,从政治制度的作用开始。本章考察了民营化分歧的性质。对于公共私有化是否、何时以及为何在道德上令人反感这一问题,本书批判性地审视并部分地拒绝了四种主流方法:分配论、动机论、社会文化论和本质主义论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Privatization and Its Discontents
This chapter provides both the motivational and the philosophical background against which an account of the wrong of privatization is then developed. It clarifies how to understand the concept of a public function and critically assesses existing answers to the question of when and why privatization is morally problematic. It also argues for a different diagnostic approach, which begins with what political institutions are for. The chapter investigates the nature of the disagreement on privatization. It critically examines and partly rejects four dominant approaches to the question of whether, when, and why the privatization of the public is morally objectionable: the distributive, motivational, sociocultural, and essentialist arguments.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信