首页> 外文期刊>Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy >Global justice as justice for a world of largely independent nations? From dualism to a multi-level ethical position
【24h】

Global justice as justice for a world of largely independent nations? From dualism to a multi-level ethical position

机译:全球正义是世界上许多独立国家的正义吗?从二元论到多层次的道德立场

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Can global justice simply be seen as social justice writ large? According to Miller it cannot. Seen from the viewpoint of justice there are fundamental differences between the national and international sphere. Just like Nagel he strongly rejects monism. Yet unlike Nagel, Miller does not confine duties of justice to sovereign states. Different forms of human association require different principles of justice. Strangely enough, however, Miller does not replace Nagel's dualism with a multi-level ethical position, but with a split-level one. In this article we argue that - contrary to Miller's own claims - his contextualist view of justice contains the necessary tools for accepting the importance of multiple contexts of justice beyond the nation-state. Even if one is committed to seeing nation-states as the privileged sites of social justice, there is no reason not to recognize substantial amounts of social justice above the nation-state level.
机译:全球正义可以简单地看作是社会正义的写照吗?根据米勒的说法,它不能。从正义的角度来看,国家和国际领域之间存在根本差异。就像纳格尔一样,他坚决拒绝一元论。然而,与纳格尔不同,米勒并未将司法义务局限于主权国家。不同形式的人际交往需要不同的正义原则。然而,奇怪的是,米勒并没有用多层次的道德立场代替纳格尔的二元论,而是用了分裂的道德立场。在本文中,我们认为,与米勒的主张相反,他的情境主义正义观包含了接受民族国家以外的多种正义环境重要性的必要工具。即使人们致力于将民族国家视为社会正义的特权场所,也没有理由不承认民族国家层面以上的大量社会正义。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号