Nonideal Justice as Nonideal Fairness

Arvan, Marcus

doi:10.1017/apa.2018.50

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 60 publications

(71 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…But now, far from being distinctly Rawlsian, the above approach to addressing injustice-identifying injustices of relative severity, creating institutions and social practices that center the interests and voices of the unjustly disadvantaged, and aiming to improve the prospects of the unjustly disadvantaged through just transfers from the unjustly privilegedenjoys broad theoretical appeal (Arvan 2019) and support in academic and activist circles (see Táíwò 2020).…”

Section: How School Boosting Defeasibly Violates Rawlsian Principles ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Educational Justice and School Boosting

Arvan

2024

Social Theory and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

School boosters are tax-exempt organizations that engage in fundraising efforts to provide public schools with supplementary resources. This paper argues that prevailing forms of school boosting are defeasibly unjust. Section 1 shows that inequalities in public education funding in the United States violate John Rawls’s two principles of domestic justice. Section 2 argues that prevailing forms of school boosting exacerbate and plausibly perpetuate these injustices. Section 3 then contends that boosting thereby defeasibly violates Rawlsian principles of nonideal theory for rectifying injustice. Thus, boosting should be presumptively either made illegal or substantially reformed. Finally, Section 4 responds to potential objections.

show abstract

Section: How School Boosting Defeasibly Violates Rawlsian Principles ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Educational Justice and School Boosting

Arvan

2024

Social Theory and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…See Erman and Möller (2013). Arvan (2014Arvan ( , 2019 attempts to show (contra Valentini) how ideal theory can be used to generate clear and morally plausible action-guiding norms in real political circumstances, at least when supplemented with nonidealized normative models. Although this latter paper attempts to refute (c) by accepting the requirement of action-guidance.…”

Section: Models and Political Realitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Scientific Models and Political Theory: The Ideal Theory Debate Revisited

Nefdt

2021

Theoria

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Political philosophy has traditionally been defined as a normative discipline with a distinctively ideal component, largely informed by moral philosophy. In this paper, I investigate a prominent critique of ideal theory specifically with the goal of resituating the debate within a larger framework in the philosophy of science. I then mount a novel case for how ideal theory should be viewed in terms of scientific modelling. I close with a discussion of how this view can dissolve apparent paradoxes and provide distinct advantages to the political theorist.

show abstract

Is Approximation of an Ideal Defensible?

Oba

2023

Res Publica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What role does our knowledge about the ideal society play in guiding policymaking in the real world? One intuitive answer is to approximate. Namely, we have a duty to approximate the ideal within the relevant constraints of feasibility. However, political philosophers seem to have what might be called ‘approximatophobia'. Many philosophers, including idealists such as David Estlund, warn against approximation. Their criticism is chiefly motivated by ‘the problem of second best’, which points out that your second-best option may not be closest to your best option. This paper aims to dispel ‘approximatophobia'. The difficulty posed by the problem of second best is often overstated. More positively, I present a novel defence of approximation, arguing that approximation of an ideal can be a reasonably reliable default strategy of action guidance in the real world. Difficulties that may afflict the project of approximation can be mitigated by sophistication of the project of approximation. After showing that critics of approximation overstep their mark in issuing the strong or moderate warning against approximation, I propose an account of sophisticated approximation. It seeks a series of reforms that make existing social institutions closer to the ideal based on careful selection of frame of analysis. Three virtuous correlations are identified as indicators for successful project of approximation, linking descriptive similarity to desirability, feasibility and knowledge of the ideal. I also explain a two-staged strategy of sophisticating the way you approximate the ideal, with an expected positive feedback effect.

show abstract

Nonideal Justice as Nonideal Fairness

Cited by 5 publications

References 60 publications

Educational Justice and School Boosting

Educational Justice and School Boosting

Scientific Models and Political Theory: The Ideal Theory Debate Revisited

Is Approximation of an Ideal Defensible?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About