Teorie sprawiedliwości społecznej: Amartya Sen i Martha Nussbaum

• Authors: Justyna Miklaszewska

Title variants

EN

Theories of Social Justice: Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum

• Languages of publication: PL

Abstracts

EN

The issue of values is essential for Amartya Sen’s political philosophy, likewise for the early works of John Rawls. Considering the fundamental political value of social justice, Sen rejects the Rawlsian attitude because of the erroneous concept of human nature, adopted by him, which led him to a „blind” morality. He proposes a diff erent approach, referring to the notion of human capabilities on which his own theory of justice is based and he investigates it in the framework of political philosophy, which takes into account the qualitative dimension of human choices. Martha Nussbaum also builds her theory of justice on this notion, however, she derives it from the Aristotelian concept of man so that it takes on a deeper philosophical meaning. The aim of this paper is to compare and to assess both these concepts of justice, referring to human capabilities, as well as to shed some light on the new path of research in political philosophy opened by them.

Keywords

EN

justice; capabilities; equality; freedom; disability

• Publisher: Instytut Filozofii i Socjologii Polskiej Akademii Nauk / Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego
• Journal: Prakseologia
• Year: 2014
• Issue: 156
• Pages: 25-46

Contributors

author

Justyna Miklaszewska

• Uniwersytet Jagielloński, ul. Grodzka 52, 31-044 Kraków

References

• Alexander J.M. [2008] Capabilities and Social Justice: The Political philosophy of Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum, Aldershot, England: Ashgate.
• Alkire S. [2013] Valuing Freedoms, Oxford, Oxford University Press. Oxford Scholarship Online [dostęp 13.09.2013].
• Cohen G.A. [2011] On the Currency of Egalitarian Justice, and other Essays in Political Philosophy, Princeton University Press.
• Miklaszewska J. [2012] Idea sprawiedliwości a problem pomocy w koncepcjach Amartyi Sena i Muhammada Yunusa, „Prakseologia” 153: 87–106.
• Nozick R. 1988 [1974] Anarchy, State and Utopia, Oxford: B. Blackwell. Nussbaum M.C. [2006] Frontiers of Justice: Disability, Nationality, Species Membership, Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
• Nussbaum M.C. [2008] Capabilities as Fundamental Entitlements: Sen and Social Justice, [w:] T. Brooks (red.) The Global Justice Reader, Malden MA: Blackwell Pub.
• Nussbaum M.C. [2011] Creating Capabilities: The Human Development Approach, Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
• Nussbaum M.C. [2012] Kant and Cosmopolitanism, [w:] G.W. Brown i D. Held (red.) The Cosmopolitanism Reader, Cambridge: Polity Press.
• Pogge T. [2011] A Critique of the Capability Approach, [w:] H. Brighouse, I. Robeyns (red.) Measuring Justice: Primary Goods and Capabilities,Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Sen A. [1982] Choice, Welfare and Measurement, Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
• Sen A. [1987] Commodities and Capabilities, New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
• Sen A. [1993] Capability and Well-being, [w:] M.C. Nussbaum i A. Sen (red.) The Quality of Life, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Sen A. [2000] (1992) Nierówności: Dalsze rozważania, przeł. I. Topińska, Kraków: Znak.
• Sen A. [2002] (1999) Rozwój i wolność. Przeł. J. Łoziński. Poznań: Zysk i Ska.
• Sen A. [2004] Dialogue: Capabilities, Lists and Public Reason, „Feminist Economics” 10(3): 77–80.
• Sen A. [2006] Identity and Violence. The Illusion of Destiny, New York: Norton.
• Sen A. [2009] The Idea of Justice, Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
• Walsh V. [2012] Smith after Sen, [w:] H. Putnam i V. Walsh (red.) The End of Value-Free Eco¬nomics, London: Routledge.