Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T15:17:14.013Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Are Reasons Enough? Sen and Ricoeur on the Idea of Impartiality

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 January 2014

TODD S. MEI
TODD S. MEI*
Affiliation:
University of Dundee
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Amartya Sen argues that a conception of impartiality built upon “trans-positional objectivity” provides a potential remedy to conflicts of distributive justice by securing the most “reasonable reasons” in a debate. This article undertakes a critical analysis of Sen’s theory by contrasting it with Paul Ricoeur’s claim that impartiality is a normative concept and therefore that the demand faced within the arena of competing distributive claims is not one of providing the most reasonable reasons but of exposing and understanding the role of convictions that underwrite normative frameworks, or ethical orders.

Amartya Sen soutient qu’une idée de l’impartialité qui se fonde sur une objectivité «trans-positionelle» offre un remède possible aux conflits de la justice distributive en s’assurant d’obtenir les «raisons» les plus «raisonnables» dans un débat. Cet article a pour intention principale de formuler une critique de l’hypothèse de Sen en la contrastant avec l’interprétation de l’impartialité proposée par Paul Ricœur. Selon Ricœur, l’impartialité est un concept normatif. Par conséquent, la tâche à assumer est de révéler et de comprendre le rôle des convictions qui établissent les bases des cadres normatifs et des systèmes éthiques, et non de procurer les raisons les plus raisonnables.

Type
Articles
Information
Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review / Revue canadienne de philosophie , Volume 53 , Issue 2 , June 2014 , pp. 243 - 270
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Philosophical Association 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abel, Olivier 2012“The Unsurpassable Dissensus: The Ethics of Forgiveness in Paul Ricoeur’s Work,” in From Ricoeur to Action: The Significance of Ricoeur’s Socio-Political Thinking, Mei, Todd and Lewin, David, eds., 211–228. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Anderson, Elizabeth 2003“Sen, Ethics, and Democracy,” Feminist Economics 9 (2–3), 239–261.Google Scholar
Anderson, Elizabeth 2001“Unstrapping the Straitjacket of ‘Preference’: A Comment on Amartya Sen’s Contributions to Philosophy and Economics,” Economics and Philosophy 17, 21–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, Elizabeth 1996“Reasons, Attitudes, and Values: Replies to Sturgeon and Piper,” Ethics 106:3, 538–554.Google Scholar
Barry, Brian 1995 Justice as Impartiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benhabib, Seyla 2002 The Claims of Culture: Equality and Diversity in the Global Era. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benhabib, Seyla 1999“The Liberal Imagination and the Four Dogmas of Multiculturalism,” The Yale Journal of Criticism 12:2, 401–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benhabib, Seyla 1986 Critique, Norm, and Utopia. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre 1977 Outline of a Theory of Practice, Nice, Richard, trans. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collingwood, R. G.1940 An Essay on Metaphysics. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Freeman, Samuel 2012“Ideal Theory and the Justice of Institutions vs. Comprehensive Outcomes,” Rutgers Law Journal 43:2, 169–209.Google Scholar
Friedman, Marilyn 1989“The Impracticality of Impartiality,” The Journal of Philosophy 86:11, 645–656.Google Scholar
Gadamer, Hans-Georg 1976 Philosophical Hermeneutics. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Gaus, Gerald 2012“Social Contract and Social Choice,” Rutgers Law Journal 43, 243–276.Google Scholar
Gaus, Gerald 2010“The Demands of Impartiality and the Evolution of Morality,” in Partiality and Impartiality: Morality, Special Relationships, and the Wider World, Feltham, Brian and Cottingham, John, eds., 41–64. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gramsci, Antonio 1975 Letters from Prison, Lawner, Lynne, trans. London: Jonathan Cape.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen 1979 Communication and the Evolution of Society, McCarthy, Thomas, trans. London: Heinemann.Google Scholar
Hausman, Daniel 2005“Sympathy, Commitment, and Preference,” Economics and Philosophy 21, 33–50.Google Scholar
Heidegger, Martin 1962 Being and Time, Macquarrie, John and Robinson, Edward, trans. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kamm, F. M.2011“Sen on Justice and Rights: A Review Essay,” Philosophy and Public Affairs 39:1, 99–103.Google Scholar
Kaplan, David 2003 Ricoeur’s Critical Theory. Albany: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
Kenaan, Hagi 2002“Language, philosophy and the risk of failure: rereading the debate between Searle and Derrida,” Continental Philosophy Review 35, 117–133.Google Scholar
MacIntyre, Alasdair 2006aEthics and Politics: Selected Essays, Volume 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
MacIntyre, Alasdair 2006bTasks of Philosophy: Selected Essays, Volume 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
MacIntyre, Alasdair 1988 Whose Justice? Which Rationality? Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
MacIntyre, Alasdair 1984 After Virtue, Second Edition. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
MacIntyre, Alasdair and Ricoeur, Paul 1969 The Religious Significance of Atheism. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Mei, Todd 2011“An Economic Turn: A Hermeneutical Reinterpretation of Political Economy with Respect to the Question of Land,” Research in Phenomenology 41, 297–326.Google Scholar
Mendus, Susan 2002 Impartiality in Moral and Political Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mirowski, Philip 1989 More Heat than Light: Economics as Social Physics, Physics as Nature’s Economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, Liam and Nagel, Thomas 2002 The Myth of Ownership: Taxes and Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
O’Neill, Onora 2010“Amartya Sen: The Idea of Justice,” The Journal of Philosophy 107:7, 384–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Neill, Onora 2009“Ethics for Communication?” European Journal of Philosophy 17:2, 167–180.Google Scholar
O’Neill, Onora 1996 Towards Justice and Virtue: A Constructive Account of Practical Reasoning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Neill, Onora 1986“The Public Use of Reason,” Political Theory 14:4, 523–551.Google Scholar
Pellauer, David 2012“Looking for the Just,” in Paul Ricoeur and the Task of Political Philosophy, Johnson, Greg S. and Stiver, Dan R., eds., 51–63, Lanham: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Petit, Philip 2005“Construing Sen on Commitment,” Economics and Philosophy 21, 15–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rancière, Jacques 2010 Dissensus: On Politics and Aesthetics, Corcoran, Steven, trans. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Ricoeur, Paul 2007 Reflections on the Just, Pellauer, David, trans. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Ricoeur, Paul 2006 On Translation, Brennan, Eileen, trans. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ricoeur, Paul 2005 The Course of Recognition, Pellauer, David, trans. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Ricoeur, Paul 2004 Memory, History, Forgetting, Blamey, Kathleen and Pellauer, David, trans. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ricoeur, Paul 2000 The Just, Pellauer, David, trans. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000.Google Scholar
Ricoeur, Paul 1998 Critique and Conviction, Blamey, Kathleen, trans. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Ricoeur, Paul 1996 “Entretien Hans Kung—Paul Ricouer: autour du ‘Manifeste pour une éthique planétaire”; available athttp://www.fondsricoeur.fr/photo/Entretien%20Hans%20KUNG%20-%20Paul%20RICOEUR%20V2.pdf, accessed September 12, 2013.Google Scholar
Ricoeur, Paul 1992 Oneself as Another, Blamey, Kathleen, trans. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Ricoeur, Paul 1991 A Ricoeur Reader: Reflection and Imagination, Valdés, Mario J., ed. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
Ricoeur, Paul 1986 Lectures on Ideology and Utopia, Taylor, George H., ed. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Ricoeur, Paul 1981 From Text to Action: Essays in Hermeneutics, Volume II. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Scheffler, Samuel 2010“Morality and Reasonable Partiality,” in Partiality and Impartiality: Morality, Special Relationships, and the Wider World, Feltham, Brian and Cottingham, John, eds., 98–130. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sen, Amartya 2009 The Idea of Justice. Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University.Google Scholar
Sen, Amartya 2006“What Do We Want from a Theory of Justice?” The Journal of Philosophy 103:5, 215–238.Google Scholar
Sen, Amartya 2005“Why Exactly Is Commitment Important for Rationality,” Economics and Philosophy 1, 5–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sen, Amartya 2003“Sraffa, Wittgenstein, and Gramsci,” Journal of Economic Literature 41, 1240–1255.Google Scholar
Sen, Amartya 2002a“Open and Closed Impartiality,” The Journal of Philosophy 99:9, 445–469.Google Scholar
Sen, Amartya 2002bRationality and Freedom. Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University.Google Scholar
Sen, Amartya 2000“Consequential Evaluation and Practical Reason,” The Journal of Philosophy 97:9, 477–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sen, Amartya 1998 On Ethics and Economics. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sen, Amartya 1997“Maximization and the Act of Choice,” Econometrica 65:4, 745–779.Google Scholar
Sen, Amartya 1993a“Capability and Well Being,” in The Quality of Life, Nussbaum, Martha C. and Sen, Amartya, eds., 30–53. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sen, Amartya 1993b“Positional Objectivity,” Philosophy and Public Affairs 22:2, 126–145.Google Scholar
Sen, Amartya 1990“Justice: Means versus Freedoms,” Philosophy and Public Affairs 19:2, 111–121.Google Scholar
Sen, Amartya 1973“Behaviour and the Concept of Preference,” Economica 40:159, 241–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, Charles 1994“The Politics of Recognition,” in Multiculturalism, Gutmann, Amy, ed., 25–73. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Tideman, Nicolaus 1982“A Tax on Land Value Is Neutral,” National Tax Journal 35:1, 190–111.Google Scholar
Thomas, Alan 2005“Reasonable Partiality and the Agent’s Point of View,” Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 8, 25–43.Google Scholar
Williams, Bernard 2008 Shame and Necessity. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Young, Iris 1990 Justice and the Politics of Difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar