She observes that time and time again, the Contractarian (such as Hobbes or Rawls) is more likely to add principles of justice concerning the disabled once the initial principles have been set – as an afterthought rather than a primary concern. Her first point is that Contractarian theories of justice confuse those individuals who generate the principles of justice within a particular society with those whom are most effected by those principles of justice. Nussbaum’s criticisms of the Social Contract tradition emphasize three key points. In particular Nussbaum focuses on how proponents of the Social Contract tradition have (not) responded to the needs and interests of disabled individuals, the global community/nationality, and non-human species. Martha Nussbaum sets out in “ Frontiers of Justice” to challenge the Social Contract tradition, the current paradigm in political philosophy insofar as it relates to theories of justice, by defending her own approach which she refers to as the “capabilities approach.” She begins by describing the historical development of the Social Contract tradition, focusing on certain writings of philosophers such as Hobbes, Locke, Hume, Kant, and most recently, John Rawls.Īfter briefly describing how the Social Contract tradition has come to exist in its contemporary form following the influences of John Rawls, Nussbaum levels some very strong criticisms against this philosophical tradition.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |