When the noted political philosopher Iris Marion Young died in 2006, her death was mourned as the passing of "one of the most important political philosophers of the past quarter-century" (Cass Sunstein) and as an important and innovative thinker working at the conjunction of a number of important topics: global justice; democracy and difference; continental political theory; ethics and international affairs; and gender, race and public policy. In her long-awaited Responsibility for Justice, Young discusses our responsibilities to address "structural" injustices in which we among many are implicated (but for which we not to blame), often by virtue of participating in a market, such as buying goods produced in sweatshops, or participating in booming housing markets that leave many homeless. Young argues that addressing these structural injustices requires a new model of responsibility, which she calls the "social connection" model. She develops this idea by clarifying the nature of structural injustice; developing the notion of political responsibility for injustice and how it differs from older ideas of blame and guilt; and finally how we can then use this model to describe our responsibilities to others no matter who we are and where we live. With a foreward by Martha C. Nussbaum, this last statement by a revered and highly influential thinker will be of great interest to political theorists and philosophers, ethicists, and feminist and political philosophers.
6 有用 Lincredible#0 2019-11-03 08:22:09
惊讶这本书竟然在豆瓣上全无关注。IMY遗作,基本状态还是手稿,但对social relation model的描述已经对当代正义研究的文献做了不小的议程设定,对structural injustice的重新定义和Shklar的ordinary evil也有不少相通之处。不过可能正是因为这一模型将结构做了行为化和弥散化的定义,使得IMY显得不愿意处理传统意义上的结构问题,比如labor sweats... 惊讶这本书竟然在豆瓣上全无关注。IMY遗作,基本状态还是手稿,但对social relation model的描述已经对当代正义研究的文献做了不小的议程设定,对structural injustice的重新定义和Shklar的ordinary evil也有不少相通之处。不过可能正是因为这一模型将结构做了行为化和弥散化的定义,使得IMY显得不愿意处理传统意义上的结构问题,比如labor sweatshop和全球资本主义、domestic housing market和新自由主义的联系这种明显的“真结构”问题在她的讨论中完全消失了,对国家的不信任和对公民自主性的过于偏好更是使得这种未来指向的责任显得能量有限。这些问题在框架被应用于讨论奴隶制问题时就更加明显了。 (展开)
0 有用 本辣鸡没干活 2022-09-15 13:30:49 美国
看了三、四两章,感觉分析别人的部分比较清楚,阐述自己的时候就打了个模子; 对自己关心的区分会花很多笔墨重复讲,对自己不那么关心的就一直在并举。当然也可能是我菜,没注意到或许很明显的区别。
0 有用 本辣鸡没干活 2022-09-15 13:30:49 美国
看了三、四两章,感觉分析别人的部分比较清楚,阐述自己的时候就打了个模子; 对自己关心的区分会花很多笔墨重复讲,对自己不那么关心的就一直在并举。当然也可能是我菜,没注意到或许很明显的区别。
6 有用 Lincredible#0 2019-11-03 08:22:09
惊讶这本书竟然在豆瓣上全无关注。IMY遗作,基本状态还是手稿,但对social relation model的描述已经对当代正义研究的文献做了不小的议程设定,对structural injustice的重新定义和Shklar的ordinary evil也有不少相通之处。不过可能正是因为这一模型将结构做了行为化和弥散化的定义,使得IMY显得不愿意处理传统意义上的结构问题,比如labor sweats... 惊讶这本书竟然在豆瓣上全无关注。IMY遗作,基本状态还是手稿,但对social relation model的描述已经对当代正义研究的文献做了不小的议程设定,对structural injustice的重新定义和Shklar的ordinary evil也有不少相通之处。不过可能正是因为这一模型将结构做了行为化和弥散化的定义,使得IMY显得不愿意处理传统意义上的结构问题,比如labor sweatshop和全球资本主义、domestic housing market和新自由主义的联系这种明显的“真结构”问题在她的讨论中完全消失了,对国家的不信任和对公民自主性的过于偏好更是使得这种未来指向的责任显得能量有限。这些问题在框架被应用于讨论奴隶制问题时就更加明显了。 (展开)