Humanity-Centred v. Associational Views
One important methodological question is whether some, or all, principles of distributive justice apply only where there is some kind of association. There are a number of different versions of this view: they differ in their account of the kind of 'association' that is needed for distributive principles to apply. Some argue that they apply only in contexts characterised by strong social bonds like nationality: others that they apply only among participants in schemes characterised by reciprocity; and some that they apply only among those subject to a common coercive power. I reject these associational views, arguing that egalitarian principles can and do apply in the absence of any pre-existing social relationship.
See, for example,
[1] ‘Cosmopolitan Justice and Equalizing Opportunities’, Metaphilosophy, vol.32 nos.1/2 (2001), pp.113-134. This has been reprinted in:
· Global Justice (Oxford: Blackwell, 2001), edited by Thomas Pogge, pp.123-144.
· Global Justice (Farnham: Ashgate, 2012), edited by Christian Barry and Holly Lawford-Smith.
[2] ‘Humanity, Associations and Global Justice: In Defence of Humanity-Centred Cosmopolitan Egalitarianism’, The Monist vol.94, no.4 (2011), pp.506–534. [This criticises 'reciprocity' based, and 'coercion' based defences of an associational view. It also argues that 'humanity-centred' approaches can accommodate the thought that social relationships have some relevance to claims about distributive justice. It draws attention to three claims about the moral relevance of social relationships for distributive justice that humanity-centred approaches can, and do, accept.]
[3] 'Cosmopolitanism and Justice' in Contemporary Debates in Political Philosophy (Oxford: Blackwell, 2009) edited by Thomas Christiano and John Christman, pp.387-407.
See, for example,
[1] ‘Cosmopolitan Justice and Equalizing Opportunities’, Metaphilosophy, vol.32 nos.1/2 (2001), pp.113-134. This has been reprinted in:
· Global Justice (Oxford: Blackwell, 2001), edited by Thomas Pogge, pp.123-144.
· Global Justice (Farnham: Ashgate, 2012), edited by Christian Barry and Holly Lawford-Smith.
[2] ‘Humanity, Associations and Global Justice: In Defence of Humanity-Centred Cosmopolitan Egalitarianism’, The Monist vol.94, no.4 (2011), pp.506–534. [This criticises 'reciprocity' based, and 'coercion' based defences of an associational view. It also argues that 'humanity-centred' approaches can accommodate the thought that social relationships have some relevance to claims about distributive justice. It draws attention to three claims about the moral relevance of social relationships for distributive justice that humanity-centred approaches can, and do, accept.]
[3] 'Cosmopolitanism and Justice' in Contemporary Debates in Political Philosophy (Oxford: Blackwell, 2009) edited by Thomas Christiano and John Christman, pp.387-407.