实现全球正义:理论与实践

IF 0.3 4区 哲学 Q4 ETHICS
Melina Duarte, Tor Ivar Hanstad
{"title":"实现全球正义:理论与实践","authors":"Melina Duarte, Tor Ivar Hanstad","doi":"10.5324/EIP.V10I2.1940","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recently, philosophers and political theorists who defend a more practical or realistic approach to the issue of global justice have challenged the purely theoretical approaches. Nevertheless, the debate can be regarded as excessively restricted to the discussion about policies and institutions neglecting the non-contingent dimensions of the problem. In principle, both positions, theoretical and practical, may be understood as diverging from each other. However, abstract and concrete demands of justice can also be complementary to each other. Thus, in this special issue of Etikk i Praksis we propose to explore the points of convergence and divergence between the theoretical and the practical approaches to global justice. We encourage submissions: (1) arguing for or against the theoretical approach; (2) arguing for or against the practical approach; (3) exploring or rejecting the possibility of convergence between them.","PeriodicalId":42362,"journal":{"name":"Etikk I Praksis","volume":"10 1","pages":"1-10"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2016-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Realizing global justice: Theory and practice\",\"authors\":\"Melina Duarte, Tor Ivar Hanstad\",\"doi\":\"10.5324/EIP.V10I2.1940\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Recently, philosophers and political theorists who defend a more practical or realistic approach to the issue of global justice have challenged the purely theoretical approaches. Nevertheless, the debate can be regarded as excessively restricted to the discussion about policies and institutions neglecting the non-contingent dimensions of the problem. In principle, both positions, theoretical and practical, may be understood as diverging from each other. However, abstract and concrete demands of justice can also be complementary to each other. Thus, in this special issue of Etikk i Praksis we propose to explore the points of convergence and divergence between the theoretical and the practical approaches to global justice. We encourage submissions: (1) arguing for or against the theoretical approach; (2) arguing for or against the practical approach; (3) exploring or rejecting the possibility of convergence between them.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42362,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Etikk I Praksis\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"1-10\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-10-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Etikk I Praksis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5324/EIP.V10I2.1940\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Etikk I Praksis","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5324/EIP.V10I2.1940","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

最近,哲学家和政治理论家捍卫一种更实际或更现实的方法来解决全球正义问题,他们对纯理论方法提出了挑战。然而,这场辩论可以被认为过分局限于讨论政策和制度,而忽视了问题的非偶然方面。原则上,这两种立场,无论是理论的还是实践的,都可以理解为是相互背离的。然而,抽象和具体的正义要求也可以相辅相成。因此,在本期《社会科学》的特刊中,我们建议探讨全球正义的理论和实践方法之间的交汇点和分歧点。我们鼓励提交:(1)支持或反对理论方法;(2)赞成或反对实际做法;(三)探索或者拒绝相互衔接的可能性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Realizing global justice: Theory and practice
Recently, philosophers and political theorists who defend a more practical or realistic approach to the issue of global justice have challenged the purely theoretical approaches. Nevertheless, the debate can be regarded as excessively restricted to the discussion about policies and institutions neglecting the non-contingent dimensions of the problem. In principle, both positions, theoretical and practical, may be understood as diverging from each other. However, abstract and concrete demands of justice can also be complementary to each other. Thus, in this special issue of Etikk i Praksis we propose to explore the points of convergence and divergence between the theoretical and the practical approaches to global justice. We encourage submissions: (1) arguing for or against the theoretical approach; (2) arguing for or against the practical approach; (3) exploring or rejecting the possibility of convergence between them.
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
Etikk I Praksis
Etikk I Praksis Multiple-
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
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