What Do We Want from A Theory of Justice?
Article Sidebar
-
نظرية العدالة, النهج الترانسندنتالي, النهج المقارن, النقاش العمومي, الحياد Justice Theory, Transcendental Approach, Comparative Approach, Public Debate, Neutrality
Abstract
The article seeks to revive the comparative approach in justice theory, challenging the dominance of Rawls’s transcendental perspective. It critiques the normative foundations of transcendentalism for producing an abstract, idealized vision of justice that ignores real-world complexities and the conditions necessary for meaningful change. By focusing solely on perfect principles, the transcendental view risks paralysis, limiting rational actors’ ability to evaluate practical alternatives for reducing injustice. In contrast, the article advocates for a comparative framework that emphasizes weighing real options, fostering public discourse, and treating justice as a cumulative process shaped by human experience and measured by tangible improvements in people’s lives. Ultimately, it calls for freeing justice theory from transcendental constraints and reorienting it toward a comparative horizon that restores its relevance and practical impact.
Full text article
References
Ackerman, Bruce A. Social Justice in the Liberal State, New Haven: Yale, 1980.
Arrow, Kenneth. “Extended Sympathy and the Possibility of Social Choice,” American Economic Review, Vol. 67, No. 1 (1977), pp. 219–225.
Arrow, Kenneth. Social Choice and Individual Values, New York: Wiley, 1951.
Atkinson, A. B. "On the Measurement of Inequality," Journal of Economic Theory, II (1970), pp. 244-263.
Beitz, Charles. “Human Rights as a Common Concern,” American Political Science Review, Vol. 95, No. 2 (Jun 2001), pp. 269-282.
Benhabib, Seyla (ed.). Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996.
Blackorby, Charles., Donaldson, David and Weymark, John. “Social Choice with Interpersonal Utility Comparisons: A Diagrammatic Introduction,” International Economic Review, Vol. 25, No. 2 (1984), pp. 527-56.
Bourbaki, N. Elements of Mathematics: Theory of Sets, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1968.
Bourbaki, N . General Topology, Parts I-II, English translation, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1966.
Cohen, Joshua and Sabel, Charles. “Extra Rempublicam Nulla Justitia?,” Philosophy and Public Affairs, Vol. 33, No. 2 (Spring 2006), pp. 147-175
Cohen, Joshua and Sabel, Charles. “Procedure and Substance in Deliberative Democracy,” in Seyla Benhabib (ed.), Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political, Princeton: University Press, 1996, pp. 95-119.
d'Aspremont, Claude and Gevers, Louis. “Equity and the Informational Basis of Collective Choice,” Review of Economic Studies, Vol. 44, No. 2 (1977), pp. 199-209.
d'Aspremont, Claude and Gevers, Louis. “Social Welfare Functionals and Interpersonal Comparability,” in K. Arrow, A. Sen and K. Suzumura (eds.), Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, Volume I, Amsterdam: North-Holland, 2002, chapters. 10-12.
d'Aspremont, Claude. “Axioms for Social Welfare Ordering,” in Leonid Hurwicz, David Schmeidler and Hugo Sonnenschein (eds.), Social Choice and Social Organization: Essays in Memory of Elisha Pazner, New York: Cambridge, 1986, pp. 19-76.
Deen Chatterjee, The Ethics of Assistance: Morality and the Distant Needy, New York: Cambridge, 2004.
Gutmann, Amy and Thompson, Dennis. Democracy and Disagreement, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1996.
Hammond, Peter J. “Equity, Arrow's Conditions, and Rawls’ Difference Principle,” Econometrica, Vol. 44, No. 4 (1976), pp. 795-804.
Joshua Cohen, “An Epistemic Conception of Democracy,” Ethic, 97 (1986-87), pp. 26-38.
Julius, A. L. “Nagel's Atlas,” Philosophy and Public Affairs, Vol. 33, No. 2 (Spring 2006), pp. 176-192.
Kolm, S.-C. "The Optimum Production of Social Justice," in J. Margolis and H. Guitton )eds.(, Public Economics, London: Macmillan, 1969, pp. 145-200
Levi, Isaac. “Amartya Sen,” Synthese, Vol. 140, No. 1-2 (2004), pp. 61-67.
Maskin, Eric. “Decision-making under Ignorance with Implications for Social Choice,” Theory and Decision, Vol. 11 (1979), pp. 319-337.
Mirrlees, James. “An Exploration of the Theory of Optimal Income Taxation,” Review of Economic Studies, Vol. 38, No. 2 (1971), pp. 175-208.
Nagel, Thomas. “The Problem of Global Justice,” Philosophy and Public Affairs, Vol. 33, No. 2 (2005), pp. 113-147.
Nagel, Thomas. “The Problem of Global Justice,” Philosophy and Public Affairs, vol. 33, No. 2 (2005), pp. 113-147
Pogge, Thomas )ed.(. Global Justice, Madden, MA: Blackwell, 2001.
Rawls, John. A Theory of Justice, Cambridge: Harvard, 1971 and 1999.
Rawls, John. Political Liberalism, New York: Columbia, 1993.
Rawls, John. The Law of Peoples, Cambridge: Harvard, 1999.
Roberts, Kevin W.S. “Interpersonal Comparability and Social Choice Theory,” Review of Economic Studies, Vol. 47, No. 2 (1980), pp. 471-439.
Runciman, W.G. and Sen, Amartya. “Games, Justice and the General Will,” Mind, Vol. 74, No. 296 (September 1965), pp. 554-562.
Scanlon, Thomas. “Contractualism and Utilitarianism,” in A. Sen and Bernard Williams (eds.), Utilitarianism and Beyond, New York: Cambridge, 1982, pp. 103-128.
Scanlon, Thomas. What We Owe to Each Other, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1998.
Sen, Amartya. “Consequential Evaluation and Practical Reason,” Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 97, No. 9 (September 2000), pp. 477-572.
Sen, Amartya. “Elements of a Theory of Human Rights,” Philosophy and Public Affairs, Vol. 32, No. 4 (2004), pp. 3l5-356.
Sen, Amartya. “Incompleteness and Reasoned Choice,” Synthese, Vol. 140, No. 1-2 (2004), pp. 43-59.
Sen, Amartya. “Internal Consistency of Choice,” Econometrica, Vol. 61, No. 3 (1993), pp. 495-521.
Sen, Amartya. “Maximization and the Act of Choice,” Econometrica, Vol. 65, No. 4 (1997), pp. 745-779.
Sen, Amartya. “Open and Closed Impartiality,” The Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 99, No. 9 (September 2002), pp. 445-469.
Sen, Amartya. “The Possibility of Social Choice,” American Economic Review, Vol. 89, No. 3 (1999), pp. 349-378.
Sen, Amartya. Collective Choice and Social Welfare, San Francisco: Holden-Day, 1970.
Sen, Amartya. Development as Freedom, New York: Knopf, 1999.
Sen, Amartya. On Economic Inequality, New York: Oxford, 1973.
Smith, Adam. Lectures on Jurisprudence, R.L. Meek, D.D. Raphael and P.G. Stein (eds.), New York: Oxford University Press, 1978.
Smith, Adam. The Theory of Maral Sentiments, Vol. 3, London: Bohn’s Stanford Library, 1853.
Suzumura, Kotaro. Rational Choice, Collective Decisions, and Social Welfare, New York: Cambridge, 1983.
de Condorcet, Marquis Essai sur l'Application de l'Analyse à la Probabilité des Décisions Rendues à la Pluralité des Voix, Paris: L’Imprimerie Royale, 1785.
Authors
Copyright (c) 2025 عبد العزيز الخال
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
yright and License
Researchers always have copyright. The research published in the Journal is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 International License. This means that every person can download, read and use the research, provided that he/she relates it to its author appropriately, stating any amendments made. This work cannot be used for commercial purposes.