Interactive justice, pluralism and oppression
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12609574 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Valeria Ottonelli (0000-0001-6754-5986, Dipartimento di Antichità Filosofia e Storia, University of Genova, Genova, Italy, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2018 |
| Volume | 22 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 473-479 |
| Publication date | 2018-06-11 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1369-8230 • E-ISSN: 1743-8772 |
| Publisher | Taylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/13698230.2018.1481611 |
| OpenAlex | W2808092189 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
| References cited | 6 |
In Interactive Justice, Ceva claims that in circumstances of intractable value conflict justice requires the application of the ‘adversary argumentation principle’ (AAP), which mandates that each side of the conflict should be heard. I raise two qualms about AAP. The first concerns its effects on deep pluralism within a liberal society. The second concerns its unfair treatment of oppressed minorities.Abbreviation AAP: Adversary Argumentation Principle
Criminology · Economic Justice · Environmental ethics · Epistemology · Law and economics · Oppression · Pluralism (philosophy · Political science · Politics · Social justice · Sociology · European and International Law Studies · Law · Law in Society and Culture · Philosophy
| Citations per year | 2 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2025 - 2026 (2) |
| Highly cited | No |