Amartya Sen의 정의론의 방법과 구조
Amartya Sen’s Theory of Justice: Its methods and structures
0
조회
0
다운로드
15
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
In this Article, Amartya Sen’s theory of justice is introduced as a alternative theory of justice. Sen has criticized Rawls’ theory of justice as a, transcendental institutionalism in that it is based on social contract and it has an arrangement-focused conception which emphasizes on constructing just institution. Instead, Sen stressed on realization-focused understanding as a approach to justice. In that way, Sen criticizes Rawls’ the two principles of justice and difference principle, which is founded on hypothetic conception such as original position and veil of ignorance. In contrast with Rawls, Sen has developed his justice theory on the assumption that human is diverse. The premise of human diversity enables us to consider that person’s capabilities play more important role in achieving individual well-being than distributing of primary goods, because distribution of primary goods depends on person’s own condition and capability. And adapting Adam Smith’s conception of “impartial spectator” which is any other fair and impartial spectator, Sen suggests open impartiality instead of 'justice as fairness’ as closed impartiality. Sen also notes that equality is important in dealing with justice. Especially, he moves questions of equality from ‘why equality’ to ‘equality of what’. It means that actually every theory of justice treats and highlights equality in different space. The fact equality and inequality coexists in different spaces implicates human diversity. Therefore what is important is not to distribute primary goods, but to convert them to person’s capabilities to achieve actual freedom. As freedom has both opportunity perspective and process perspective, it is important to have capability as achievement of freedom and it can be called development as actual freedom. Of course, Sen’s theory of justice has some limits like other political theories. However, it not only functions as an alternative theory of justice, but also suggests useful way to understand the nature of justice in this world.
Abstract
In this Article, Amartya Sen’s theory of justice is introduced as a alternative theory of justice. Sen has criticized Rawls’ theory of justice as a, transcendental institutionalism in that it is based on social contract and it has an arrangement-focused conception which emphasizes on constructing just institution. Instead, Sen stressed on realization-focused understanding as a approach to justice. In that way, Sen criticizes Rawls’ the two principles of justice and difference principle, which is founded on hypothetic conception such as original position and veil of ignorance. In contrast with Rawls, Sen has developed his justice theory on the assumption that human is diverse. The premise of human diversity enables us to consider that person’s capabilities play more important role in achieving individual well-being than distributing of primary goods, because distribution of primary goods depends on person’s own condition and capability. And adapting Adam Smith’s conception of “impartial spectator” which is any other fair and impartial spectator, Sen suggests open impartiality instead of 'justice as fairness’ as closed impartiality. Sen also notes that equality is important in dealing with justice. Especially, he moves questions of equality from ‘why equality’ to ‘equality of what’. It means that actually every theory of justice treats and highlights equality in different space. The fact equality and inequality coexists in different spaces implicates human diversity. Therefore what is important is not to distribute primary goods, but to convert them to person’s capabilities to achieve actual freedom. As freedom has both opportunity perspective and process perspective, it is important to have capability as achievement of freedom and it can be called development as actual freedom. Of course, Sen’s theory of justice has some limits like other political theories. However, it not only functions as an alternative theory of justice, but also suggests useful way to understand the nature of justice in this world.
참고문헌 (39)
- Inequality Re-examined, "Amartya Sen", Yale Universlty, The Economic Growth Center, 15~, pp.Occasional Paper No. 2 (1989)
- Andrew Williams, "Dworkin on Capability", Symposium on Ronald Dworkin’s Sovereign Virtue, 113(1), pp.23~39 (2002)
- Arrow, "Amartya K. Sen’s Contributions to the Study of Social Welfare", The Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 101(2), pp.163~172 (1999)
- Arrow, "Some Ordinalist-Utilitarian Notes on Rawls’s Theory of Justice", Journal of Philosophy, 70, pp.245~263
- Atkinson, "The Contributions of Amartya Sen to Welfare Economics", The Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 101(2), pp.177~ (1999)
- 이정우, "복지국가와 경제이론", pp.90~ (2008), 학지사
- Berlin, "Four Essays on Liberty" (1969), Oxford University Press
- Bowles, Edwards, "자본주의 이해하기: 경쟁·명령·변화의 3차원 경제학", pp.143~ (2009), 후마니타스
- Cohen, "Rescuing Justice and Equality" (2008), Harvard University Press
- Dworkin, "Sovereign Virtue: The Theory and Practice of Equality" (2002), Harvard University Press
- John, Kane, "Justice, Impartiality, and Equality: Why the Concept of Justice Does Not Presume Equality", Political Theory, 24(3), pp.387~ (1996)
- Mathis, "Efficiency Instead of Justice? ? Searching for the Philosophical Foundations of the Economic Analysis of Law", pp.138~ (2009), Springer
- Nozick, Anarchy, "State, and Utopia" (1975), Blackwell
- Nussbaum, "Capabilities and Social Justice", International Relations and the New Inequality, 4(2), pp.134~135 (2002)
- Nussbaum, "Long-Term Care and Social Justice: A Challenge to Conventional Ideas of Social Contract. in Ethical Choice in Long-Term Care: What Does Justice Care?", pp.43~ (2002), WHO
- Rae, "Equalities", pp.151~ (1981), Harvard University Press
- Rawls, "정의론", pp.136~ (2003), 이학사
- S. I. Benn, "Social Principles and the Democratic State", pp.111~ (1959), Allen & Unwin
- Scanlon, "우리가 서로에게 지는 의무 : 계약주의적 도덕개념 분석", pp.21~ (2008), 한울
- Sen, "윤리학과 경제학", pp.23~ (1999), 한울아카데미
- Sen, "자유로서의 발전", pp.38~ (2001), 세종연구원
- Sen, "불평등의 재검토", pp.59~ (1992), 한울
- Sen, "Rational Fools: A Critique of the Behavioral Foundations of Economic Theory", Philosophy and Public Affairs, 6(4), pp.317~344 (1977)
- Sen, "Commodity and Capability" (1985), Elsvier Science Publishers
- Sen, "Rationality and Freedom" (2002), Belknap Press of Harvard University Press
- Sen, "The Idea of Justice", pp.12~15 (2009), Belknap Press of Harvard University Press
- Walzer, "Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pluralism and Equality" (1983), Basic Books
- 고원, "대안적 발전론에서 ‘인간중심’ 담론에 대한 정치철학적 검토 : 센과 롤스를 중심으로", 민주주의와 인권, 10(1), pp.225~254 (2010), 5.18연구소
- 김대근, "권리에 대한 법경제학적 분석의 의의와 한계", 박사, pp.2010
- 남경직, "아나키에서 유토피아로: 自由主義 國家의 철학적 기초" (1997), 문학과 지성사
- 목광수, "역량 중심 접근법과 인정의 문제 ― 개발 윤리와의 관련 하에서 고찰 ―", 철학, (104), pp.215~239 (2010), 한국철학회
- 시오노야 유이치, "경제와 윤리: 복지국가의 철학", pp.138~ (2006), 필맥
- 염수균, "자유주의적평등" (2005), 한길사
- 이상돈, "기초법학", pp.7~ (2010), 법문사
- 이상호, "센의 ‘능력’과 사회정의 ? 롤스의 정의관에 대한 비교를 중심으로", 사회경제평론, (17), pp.303~ (2001)
- 이은아, "장기요양보호제도의 윤리적 근거에 관한 철학적 고찰 : 롤즈의 정의론과 센의 인간능력접근을 중심으로", 한국사회정책, 15(1), pp.129~161 (2008), 한국사회정책학회
- 임의영, "사회적 형평성의 정의론적 기초 ? A. Sen의 능력이론을 중심으로", 한국행정학회 2010년도 공동학술대회, pp.21~ (2010)
- 정원섭, "정의와 다원적 평등: 정의의 영역들" (1999), 철학과현실사
- 호모 사케르, "주권 권력과 벌거벗은 생명" (2008), 새물결