民主的幽灵

T. Fitzpatrick
{"title":"民主的幽灵","authors":"T. Fitzpatrick","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780190859213.003.0016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter explores how those interested in the making, implementation, and effects of government policies might approach the stand-off between Rawlsians and the capabilities approach. It proposes we should want any theory of justice to do lots of different things. It argues that both perspectives wrestle with an “elasticity problem” to which there is no final, ideal solution. The limitations of Rawls lie in trying to make capabilities adjuncts to the primary goods; the limitations of the capability approach derive from allowing capabilities to occlude the material-distributive characteristics of resources and the political strategies of capitalism. The chapter considers several means of dealing with the elasticity problem, before proposing a possible way forward. This involves not a grand, syncretic reconciliation but one that is, nonetheless, multiperspectivist in intent and method. The task for students of policy studies is therefore to find practical, institutional forms for this multiperspectivism.","PeriodicalId":358396,"journal":{"name":"John Rawls","volume":"38 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Specters of Democracy\",\"authors\":\"T. Fitzpatrick\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/oso/9780190859213.003.0016\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This chapter explores how those interested in the making, implementation, and effects of government policies might approach the stand-off between Rawlsians and the capabilities approach. It proposes we should want any theory of justice to do lots of different things. It argues that both perspectives wrestle with an “elasticity problem” to which there is no final, ideal solution. The limitations of Rawls lie in trying to make capabilities adjuncts to the primary goods; the limitations of the capability approach derive from allowing capabilities to occlude the material-distributive characteristics of resources and the political strategies of capitalism. The chapter considers several means of dealing with the elasticity problem, before proposing a possible way forward. This involves not a grand, syncretic reconciliation but one that is, nonetheless, multiperspectivist in intent and method. The task for students of policy studies is therefore to find practical, institutional forms for this multiperspectivism.\",\"PeriodicalId\":358396,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"John Rawls\",\"volume\":\"38 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-07-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"John Rawls\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190859213.003.0016\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"John Rawls","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190859213.003.0016","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

本章探讨了那些对政府政策的制定、实施和影响感兴趣的人如何处理罗尔斯主义和能力方法之间的对峙。它提出我们应该让任何正义理论做很多不同的事情。它认为,这两种观点都在与一个“弹性问题”作斗争,而这个问题没有最终的、理想的解决方案。罗尔斯的局限性在于他试图把能力作为初级商品的附属物;能力方法的局限性来自于允许能力掩盖资源的物质分配特征和资本主义的政治战略。本章考虑了处理弹性问题的几种方法,然后提出了一种可能的方法。这不是一种宏大的、融合的和解,而是一种在意图和方法上具有多视角的和解。因此,政策研究学生的任务是为这种多视角主义找到切实可行的制度形式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Specters of Democracy
This chapter explores how those interested in the making, implementation, and effects of government policies might approach the stand-off between Rawlsians and the capabilities approach. It proposes we should want any theory of justice to do lots of different things. It argues that both perspectives wrestle with an “elasticity problem” to which there is no final, ideal solution. The limitations of Rawls lie in trying to make capabilities adjuncts to the primary goods; the limitations of the capability approach derive from allowing capabilities to occlude the material-distributive characteristics of resources and the political strategies of capitalism. The chapter considers several means of dealing with the elasticity problem, before proposing a possible way forward. This involves not a grand, syncretic reconciliation but one that is, nonetheless, multiperspectivist in intent and method. The task for students of policy studies is therefore to find practical, institutional forms for this multiperspectivism.
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