Justice for Jerks

Social Theory and Practice 42 (4):748-766 (2016)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Recent debates about the relationship between ideal and nonideal theory have begun to focus on exploring the concept of political feasibility and the role that feasibility considerations should play in a theory of justice. In this article I argue that if there are facts that constrain what is feasible for human beings to motivate themselves to do, these facts ought to be understood as constraints on what justice can demand of us. I begin by explaining why our feasibility considerations must be sensitive to facts about motivational capacities. I then argue that taking motivational constraints seriously need not commit us to an overly concessive theory of justice.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,337

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Towards a ‘Non‐Ideal’ Non‐Ideal Theory.Brian Carey - 2014 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 32 (2):147-162.
Justice, Feasibility, and Social Science as it is.Emily McTernan - 2019 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 22 (1):27-40.
Motivational Limitations on the Demands of Justice.David Wiens - 2016 - European Journal of Political Theory 15 (3):333-352.
Justice and Feasibility: A Dynamic Approach.Pablo Gilabert - 2017 - In Kevin Vallier & Michael Weber (eds.), Political Utopias: Contemporary Debates. New York, NY: Oup Usa. pp. 95-126.
Nonideal theory and compliance—A clarification.Naima Chahboun - 2015 - European Journal of Political Theory 14 (2):229-245.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-02-14

Downloads
31 (#728,019)

6 months
4 (#1,247,585)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references