CEU Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2013
| Author | Konjovic, Marko |
|---|---|
| Title | In Search of Social Justice: the Capabilities Approach v. Resourcist Theories |
| Summary | In this thesis I defend the distinctive character of the Capabilities Approach as a theory of social justice. In order to justify my claim I firstly analyze John Rawls’s theory of justice as fairness and argue that it does not offer plausible solutions to some key concerns the Capabilities Approach highlights. Particularly, I argue that Rawls unjustifiably excludes disabled people from the original position; moreover, I argue that his theory as presented in A Theory of Justice, does not have the methodology to extend the principles of justice so as to include the interests and needs of disabled citizens. Secondly, I analyze Thomas Pogge’s defence of Rawlsian resourcism and argue that his counter-arguments rest on a deep misunderstanding of the Capabilities Approach and of its underlying motivations. Finally, I argue contra Ronald Dworkin that the Capabilities Approach is distinct from his resource egalitarianism. I argue that Dworkin’s theory fails to capture fully the strength of socially created inequalities; this, in turn, represents a significant distinction between his theory on the one hand and the Capabilities Approach on the other. Moreover, by analyzing Martha Nussbaum’s version of the approach I explicate a further difference between these two theories. I conclude that the Capabilities Approach is, in fact, a self-standing theory of social justice, although there are several major concerns that capabilities theorists need to address in order to show the superiority of their theory over resourcists views. |
| Supervisor | Miklosi, Zoltan |
| Department | Philosophy MA |
| Full text | https://www.etd.ceu.edu/2013/konjovic_marko.pdf |
Visit the CEU Library.
© 2007-2021, Central European University