Abstract

This chapter outlines the systematic study of social primary goods approach and the capability approach to measuring justice. One way in which political theorists and philosophers have responded to the debate between Rawls and Amartya Sen is by defending the social primary goods or the capability approach on grounds of their theoretical properties. In her contribution, Elizabeth Anderson sets herself the task of defending the capability approach, in particular her own version of the approach (Anderson 1999), against Pogge's criticism. The book Measuring Justice closes with an essay in which Sen reflects on the influence of John Rawls on his own thinking, and on the contributions in the first part of the volume. The essay clearly illustrates the absence of consensus among political theorists and philosophers about whether either the social primary goods approach or the capability approach is to be preferred as a metric of justice.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.