UCSD PHIL 167 - DWORKIN AND CRITICS (6 pages)

Previewing pages 1, 2 of 6 page document View the full content.
View Full Document

DWORKIN AND CRITICS



Previewing pages 1, 2 of actual document.

View the full content.
View Full Document
View Full Document

DWORKIN AND CRITICS

26 views


Pages:
6
School:
University of California, San Diego
Course:
Phil 167 - Contemporary Political Philosophy
Contemporary Political Philosophy Documents

Unformatted text preview:

1 LECTURE NOTES PHILOSOPHY 167 DWORKIN AND CRITICS 1 A taxonomy of views What do we owe one another One view is that we should always respect everyone s Lockean rights One respects a right by not violating it This Nozickian view is criticized by Amartya Sen Rights and Agency on the ground that we ought to promote overall nonviolation of rights This would be to treat rights as goals not side constraints Sen also disagrees with Nozick about what rights people have Sen suggests that morally fundamental rights are rights to capability or real freedom to achieve important human functionings John Rawls makes a different proposal as to the fundamental moral rights of individuals He proposes that people have rights 1 to equal basic liberties of democratic citizenship e g free speech and the right to vote and stand for office in free elections 2 to fair equality of opportunity all with the same native talent and the same ambition should have the same prospects for success in competitions for positions that confer social and economic benefits and 3 to social arrangements that maximize the long run social and economic benefits of the least advantaged These principles are nested 1 having strict lexical priority over the others and 2 having strict lexical priority over 3 These principles together are asserted to express the vision of a democratic society of free and equal citizens Rawls presents his view as a political conception of justice It is purported to be reasonable for us to accept given the diversity of ultimate ethical beliefs among reasonable citizens It is presented as a solution to the problem how can government be legitimate if people reasonably affirm different and opposed conceptions of the good and the right A legitimate government coerces people and imposes policies on them only in the name of principles that it would be unreasonable to reject Rawls supposes that a government can be legitimate even in a diverse society if the political conception of justice



View Full Document

Access the best Study Guides, Lecture Notes and Practice Exams

Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view DWORKIN AND CRITICS and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view DWORKIN AND CRITICS and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?