Social and Cosmopolitan Liberalism

Datos Bibliográficos

ID3686743
AutoresCharles R Beitz (Bowdoin College, autor de correspondencia)
Año1999
Volumen75
Número3
Páginas515-529
Fecha de publicación1999-07-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaInternational Affairs (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0020-5850 • E-ISSN: 1468-2346
EditorialOxford University Press (OUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1111/1468-2346.00091
OpenAlexW2093312376
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas66

A central divide in philosophical thought about international distributive justice separates ‘social’ from ‘cosmopolitan’ liberalism. These views differ about the nature of the problem of international justice: social liberals are primarily concerned about fairness to states or societies, whereas cosmopolitan liberals are concerned about fairness to individuals. This article explores three reasons why philosophers interested in international distributive justice often regard social liberalism as the more plausible view. These reasons have to do with alleged differences between domestic and international society: empirical beliefs about the sources of backwardness; and moral preconceptions about the fairest allocation of the costs of irresponsible economic and population policies. The article argues that none of these reasons is persuasive, and that the deep ethical distinction between the domestic and the international realms, on which social liberalism depends, is more difficult to defend that many philosophers have thought

Backwardness · Distributive justice · Economic Justice · Economics · Environmental ethics · Law and economics · Liberalism · Neoclassical economics · Political science · Politics · Population · Positive economics · Social science · Sociology · Law · Philosophy · Political Philosophy and Ethics