“撒马利亚”和“萨沙姆塔”的能力:为正义话语开脱

IF 0.6 Q3 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Charusheel Tripathi
{"title":"“撒马利亚”和“萨沙姆塔”的能力:为正义话语开脱","authors":"Charusheel Tripathi","doi":"10.1080/02185377.2020.1731695","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This research paper will commence with an attempt to bifurcate the traditional theories of justice from its modern counterparts. Under the former category, works of the Greek philosophers like Plato and Aristotle will be analysed. The modern theories, on the other hand, would comprise of the utilitarian metric of Jeremy Bentham and J. S. Mill along with Rawls’ difference principle and justice as fairness and would further bring out the differences in theories and approaches in general. In contrast to all this, the last few sections of this paper will be dedicated to Amartya Sen’s approach to freedom, equality and justice and the reasons it provided for being a better metric for evaluating social justice as compared to former archaic alternative conceptualizations. It will try to determine the authenticity of the differentiation between ‘transcendental institutionalism’ and ‘realization-focused comparison paradigms’, the attributes or focal variables of the capability approach and its linkage to public reason, development and deliberative democracy. Thus, the paper will try to map the linear progression of the concept of justice along with its kindred concepts of liberty and equality and how this eventually resulted in the conceptualization of capability as ‘Samarthya’ and ‘Sakshamta’.","PeriodicalId":44333,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Political Science","volume":"28 1","pages":"212 - 235"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/02185377.2020.1731695","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Capability as ‘Samarthya’ and ‘Sakshamta’: exonerating the discourse on justice\",\"authors\":\"Charusheel Tripathi\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/02185377.2020.1731695\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This research paper will commence with an attempt to bifurcate the traditional theories of justice from its modern counterparts. Under the former category, works of the Greek philosophers like Plato and Aristotle will be analysed. The modern theories, on the other hand, would comprise of the utilitarian metric of Jeremy Bentham and J. S. Mill along with Rawls’ difference principle and justice as fairness and would further bring out the differences in theories and approaches in general. In contrast to all this, the last few sections of this paper will be dedicated to Amartya Sen’s approach to freedom, equality and justice and the reasons it provided for being a better metric for evaluating social justice as compared to former archaic alternative conceptualizations. It will try to determine the authenticity of the differentiation between ‘transcendental institutionalism’ and ‘realization-focused comparison paradigms’, the attributes or focal variables of the capability approach and its linkage to public reason, development and deliberative democracy. Thus, the paper will try to map the linear progression of the concept of justice along with its kindred concepts of liberty and equality and how this eventually resulted in the conceptualization of capability as ‘Samarthya’ and ‘Sakshamta’.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44333,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asian Journal of Political Science\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"212 - 235\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-08-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/02185377.2020.1731695\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asian Journal of Political Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/02185377.2020.1731695\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Journal of Political Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02185377.2020.1731695","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要本文将试图将传统的正义理论与现代的正义理论区分开来。在前一类中,我们将分析柏拉图和亚里士多德等希腊哲学家的著作。另一方面,现代理论将包括边沁和密尔的功利主义度量,以及罗尔斯的差异原则和公平正义,并将进一步导致理论和方法的普遍差异。与所有这些相反,本文的最后几节将专门讨论Amartya Sen对自由、平等和正义的态度,以及与以前陈旧的替代概念相比,它成为评估社会正义的更好指标的原因。它将试图确定“先验制度主义”和“以实现为中心的比较范式”之间区别的真实性,能力方法的属性或焦点变量及其与公共理性、发展和协商民主的联系。因此,本文将试图绘制正义概念及其自由和平等的相似概念的线性发展图,以及这最终是如何导致能力概念化为“Samarthya”和“Sakshamta”的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Capability as ‘Samarthya’ and ‘Sakshamta’: exonerating the discourse on justice
ABSTRACT This research paper will commence with an attempt to bifurcate the traditional theories of justice from its modern counterparts. Under the former category, works of the Greek philosophers like Plato and Aristotle will be analysed. The modern theories, on the other hand, would comprise of the utilitarian metric of Jeremy Bentham and J. S. Mill along with Rawls’ difference principle and justice as fairness and would further bring out the differences in theories and approaches in general. In contrast to all this, the last few sections of this paper will be dedicated to Amartya Sen’s approach to freedom, equality and justice and the reasons it provided for being a better metric for evaluating social justice as compared to former archaic alternative conceptualizations. It will try to determine the authenticity of the differentiation between ‘transcendental institutionalism’ and ‘realization-focused comparison paradigms’, the attributes or focal variables of the capability approach and its linkage to public reason, development and deliberative democracy. Thus, the paper will try to map the linear progression of the concept of justice along with its kindred concepts of liberty and equality and how this eventually resulted in the conceptualization of capability as ‘Samarthya’ and ‘Sakshamta’.
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
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
期刊介绍: Asian Journal of Political Science ( AJPS) is an international refereed journal affiliated to the Graduate School of Public Administration, Seoul National University. Published since 1993, AJPS is a leading journal on Asian politics and governance. It publishes high-quality original articles in major areas of political science, including comparative politics, political thought, international relations, public policy, and public administration, with specific reference to Asian regions and countries. AJPS aims to address some of the most contemporary political and administrative issues in Asia (especially in East, South, and Southeast Asia) at the local, national, and global levels. The journal can be of great value to academic experts, researchers, and students in the above areas of political science as well as to practical policy makers, state institutions, and international agencies.
×
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