内容
This book looks at concepts of justice from points of view of various religious and cultural traditions (Hinduism, Islam, Christianity, Cosmopolitanism, Tribal Cultures) and different methodological perspectives (historical, theological, philosophical, sociological). One common thread in these essays is the reflection on ethics universally and reference to the basic values of the Indian constitution. People from all categories were included in the dialog process on justice in order to avoid any risk of unintentionally missing out people belonging to certain categories.This volume attempts to express the opinions of people whose voices were not very prominent in theoretical debates on justice and its practical implications. Their perspectives on justice are contrasted with mainstream conceptions of justice, whose problematic representativeness for India today is thereby interpreted. Both abstract universalism and relativism lack a common point of reference to assess relevance and adequacy of a given conception of justice. Neither unaffected universalism nor relativism defined by traditional norms turns is sustainable. The contributors offer a concept of ‘internal universalism’ as an alternative to unaffected universalism. Combining various forms and stages of ‘reflective equilibrium’ as conceived by John Rawls, this framework provides us with the necessary reference point to assess the adequacy as proposed in this book and engage in a comprehensive dialog on questions of justice.
作者
This book looks at concepts of justice from points of view of various religious and cultural traditions (Hinduism, Islam, Christianity, Cosmopolitanism, Tribal Cultures) and different methodological perspectives (historical, theological, philosophical, sociological). One common thread in these essays is the reflection on ethics universally and reference to the basic values of the Indian constitution. People from all categories were included in the dialog process on justice in order to avoid any risk of unintentionally missing out people belonging to certain categories.This volume attempts to express the opinions of people whose voices were not very prominent in theoretical debates on justice and its practical implications. Their perspectives on justice are contrasted with mainstream conceptions of justice, whose problematic representativeness for India today is thereby interpreted. Both abstract universalism and relativism lack a common point of reference to assess relevance and adequacy of a given conception of justice. Neither unaffected universalism nor relativism defined by traditional norms turns is sustainable. The contributors offer a concept of ‘internal universalism’ as an alternative to unaffected universalism. Combining various forms and stages of ‘reflective equilibrium’ as conceived by John Rawls, this framework provides us with the necessary reference point to assess the adequacy as proposed in this book and engage in a comprehensive dialog on questions of justice.
目录
Contents
1. DOING THE RIGHT THING………………..3
2. THE GREATEST HAPPINESS PRINCIPLE / UTILITARIANISM………………..31
3. DO WE OWN OURSELVES? / LIBERTARIANISM………………..58
4. HIRED HELP / MARKETS AND MORALS………………..75
5. WHAT MATTERS IS THE MOTIVE / IMMANUEL KANT………………..103
6. THE CASE FOR EQUALITY / JOHN RAWLS………………..140
7. ARGUING AFFIRMATIVE ACTION………………..167
8. WHO DESERVES WHAT? / ARISTOTLE………………..184
9. WHAT DO WE OWE ONE ANOTHER? / DILEMMAS OF LOYALTY………………..208
10. JUSTICE AND THE COMMON GOOD………………..244
NOTES………………..271
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS………………..293
INDEX………………..295