Going Evaluative' to Save Justice from Feasibility-a Pyrrhic Victory

Bibliographic Data

ID4351284
AuthorsDavid Wiens (0000-0002-2221-0725, University of California San Diego, corresponding author)
Year2014
Volume64
Issue255
Pages301-307
Publication date2014-04-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueThe Philosophical Quarterly (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0031-8094 • E-ISSN: 1467-9213
PublisherOxford University Press (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1093/pq/pqt057
OpenAlexW1994898859
LanguageEN
Citations received13

I discuss Gheaus’ argument against the claim that the requirements of justice are not constrained by feasibility concerns. I show that the general strategy exemplified by this argument is not only dialectically puzzling, but also imposes a heavy cost on theories of justice—puzzling because it simply sidesteps a presupposition of any plausible formulation of the so-called ‘feasibility requirement’ and costly because it deprives justice of its normative implications for action. I also show that Gheaus’ attempt to recover this normative force presupposes an epistemic dimension to the feasibility requirement that most proponents of that requirement would reject.

Action (physics) · Argument (complex analysis) · Dimension (graph theory) · Economic Justice · Epistemology · Law and economics · Normative · Political science · Presupposition · Sociology · Free Will and Agency · Law · Mathematics · Philosophical Ethics and Theory · Philosophy · Political Philosophy and Ethics

Tools

Open DOISci-HubOpen Access