No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Justice in Jeopardy if Needs Not Met: A Reply to Gillian Brock
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 13 April 2010
Extract
From Gillian Brock's vigorous probing (Brock 1994, 1996) of my treatment of meeting needs in my book of that title (Braybrooke 1987) I have learned a good deal; and from the article published in Dialogue, which concerns in particular the connection that I made between justice and needs, I have certainly learned how my arguments for that connection might have been expressed more cogently. Yet I think that the arguments I intended, and even the arguments I expressed, escape her criticisms. She quotes a number of leading assertions drawn one by one from my text, but consolidates into one argument what are best regarded as three different, though connected, arguments, to the disadvantage of their respective strengths. She also disregards, to their disadvantage, the distinction between “respect for a person M's position”—my phrasing, meaning M's position under some assignment of benefits and burdens—and “respect for a person M”—a notion that does not come into the three arguments.
- Type
- Intervention/Discussion
- Information
- Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review / Revue canadienne de philosophie , Volume 37 , Issue 4 , Fall 1998 , pp. 799 - 804
- Copyright
- Copyright © Canadian Philosophical Association 1998