Article contents
In defence of fact-dependency
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 January 2020
Abstract
G.A. Cohen and David Estlund claim that, because of their fact-dependent nature, constructivist theories of justice do not qualify as moral theories about fundamental values such as justice. In this paper, I defend fact-dependent, constructivist theories of justice against this fact-independency critique. I argue that constructivists can invoke facts among the grounds for accepting fundamental principles of justice while maintaining that the foundation of morality has to be non-empirical. My claim is that constructivists ultimately account for the normativity of fact-dependent principles by referring to a fact-independent, moral conception of the person, which is not a principle of justice.1
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Canadian Journal of Philosophy 2014
References
- 1
- Cited by