Motivational limitations on the demands of justice
Do motivational limitations due to human nature constrain the demands of justice? Among those who say no, David Estlund offers perhaps the most compelling argument. Taking Estlund’s analysis of ‘ability’ as a starting point, I show that motivational deficiencies can constrain the demands of justice...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | European journal of political theory 2016-07, Vol.15 (3), p.333-352 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 352 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 333 |
container_title | European journal of political theory |
container_volume | 15 |
creator | Wiens, David |
description | Do motivational limitations due to human nature constrain the demands of justice? Among those who say no, David Estlund offers perhaps the most compelling argument. Taking Estlund’s analysis of ‘ability’ as a starting point, I show that motivational deficiencies can constrain the demands of justice under at least one common circumstance – that the motivationally deficient agent makes a good faith effort to overcome her deficiency. In fact, my argument implies something stronger; namely, that the demands of justice are constrained by what people are sufficiently likely to be motivated to do. Thus, contrary to the prevailing wisdom, it is the business of ideal theory – not just nonideal theory – to work with the motivational capacities people are likely enough to have. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1177/1474885115578446 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1801772051</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_1474885115578446</sage_id><sourcerecordid>1801772051</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c351t-93cf43b5734498f5c2ee68dbe2a084e9c8b6c9f889ed8b8988126518c1fab5593</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1UEtLxDAQDqLgunr3WPBczeTRTI6y-IIVL3ouaZpoSx9rkwr-e7PWgwieZj6-BzMfIedALwGUugKhBKIEkFKhEMUBWYESkDPF6WHaE53v-WNyEkJLKaNa8BVhj2NsPkxsxsF0Wdf0TfwGIRuHLL65rHa9GeoEfdbOITbWnZIjb7rgzn7mmrzc3jxv7vPt093D5nqbWy4h5ppbL3glFRdCo5eWOVdgXTlmKAqnLVaF1R5Ruxor1IjACglowZtKSs3X5GLJ3U3j--xCLNtxntKZoQSk6WdGJSQVXVR2GkOYnC93U9Ob6bMEWu6bKf82kyz5Ygnm1f0K_U__BSiGYaM</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1801772051</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Motivational limitations on the demands of justice</title><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>SAGE Complete</source><creator>Wiens, David</creator><creatorcontrib>Wiens, David</creatorcontrib><description>Do motivational limitations due to human nature constrain the demands of justice? Among those who say no, David Estlund offers perhaps the most compelling argument. Taking Estlund’s analysis of ‘ability’ as a starting point, I show that motivational deficiencies can constrain the demands of justice under at least one common circumstance – that the motivationally deficient agent makes a good faith effort to overcome her deficiency. In fact, my argument implies something stronger; namely, that the demands of justice are constrained by what people are sufficiently likely to be motivated to do. Thus, contrary to the prevailing wisdom, it is the business of ideal theory – not just nonideal theory – to work with the motivational capacities people are likely enough to have.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1474-8851</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1741-2730</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/1474885115578446</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London, England: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Human nature ; Justice</subject><ispartof>European journal of political theory, 2016-07, Vol.15 (3), p.333-352</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2015</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c351t-93cf43b5734498f5c2ee68dbe2a084e9c8b6c9f889ed8b8988126518c1fab5593</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c351t-93cf43b5734498f5c2ee68dbe2a084e9c8b6c9f889ed8b8988126518c1fab5593</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1474885115578446$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1474885115578446$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,21799,27903,27904,43600,43601</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Wiens, David</creatorcontrib><title>Motivational limitations on the demands of justice</title><title>European journal of political theory</title><description>Do motivational limitations due to human nature constrain the demands of justice? Among those who say no, David Estlund offers perhaps the most compelling argument. Taking Estlund’s analysis of ‘ability’ as a starting point, I show that motivational deficiencies can constrain the demands of justice under at least one common circumstance – that the motivationally deficient agent makes a good faith effort to overcome her deficiency. In fact, my argument implies something stronger; namely, that the demands of justice are constrained by what people are sufficiently likely to be motivated to do. Thus, contrary to the prevailing wisdom, it is the business of ideal theory – not just nonideal theory – to work with the motivational capacities people are likely enough to have.</description><subject>Human nature</subject><subject>Justice</subject><issn>1474-8851</issn><issn>1741-2730</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><recordid>eNp1UEtLxDAQDqLgunr3WPBczeTRTI6y-IIVL3ouaZpoSx9rkwr-e7PWgwieZj6-BzMfIedALwGUugKhBKIEkFKhEMUBWYESkDPF6WHaE53v-WNyEkJLKaNa8BVhj2NsPkxsxsF0Wdf0TfwGIRuHLL65rHa9GeoEfdbOITbWnZIjb7rgzn7mmrzc3jxv7vPt093D5nqbWy4h5ppbL3glFRdCo5eWOVdgXTlmKAqnLVaF1R5Ruxor1IjACglowZtKSs3X5GLJ3U3j--xCLNtxntKZoQSk6WdGJSQVXVR2GkOYnC93U9Ob6bMEWu6bKf82kyz5Ygnm1f0K_U__BSiGYaM</recordid><startdate>201607</startdate><enddate>201607</enddate><creator>Wiens, David</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>Sage Publications Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7UB</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201607</creationdate><title>Motivational limitations on the demands of justice</title><author>Wiens, David</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c351t-93cf43b5734498f5c2ee68dbe2a084e9c8b6c9f889ed8b8988126518c1fab5593</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Human nature</topic><topic>Justice</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Wiens, David</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><jtitle>European journal of political theory</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Wiens, David</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Motivational limitations on the demands of justice</atitle><jtitle>European journal of political theory</jtitle><date>2016-07</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>15</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>333</spage><epage>352</epage><pages>333-352</pages><issn>1474-8851</issn><eissn>1741-2730</eissn><abstract>Do motivational limitations due to human nature constrain the demands of justice? Among those who say no, David Estlund offers perhaps the most compelling argument. Taking Estlund’s analysis of ‘ability’ as a starting point, I show that motivational deficiencies can constrain the demands of justice under at least one common circumstance – that the motivationally deficient agent makes a good faith effort to overcome her deficiency. In fact, my argument implies something stronger; namely, that the demands of justice are constrained by what people are sufficiently likely to be motivated to do. Thus, contrary to the prevailing wisdom, it is the business of ideal theory – not just nonideal theory – to work with the motivational capacities people are likely enough to have.</abstract><cop>London, England</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><doi>10.1177/1474885115578446</doi><tpages>20</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1474-8851 |
ispartof | European journal of political theory, 2016-07, Vol.15 (3), p.333-352 |
issn | 1474-8851 1741-2730 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_1801772051 |
source | Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; SAGE Complete |
subjects | Human nature Justice |
title | Motivational limitations on the demands of justice |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-24T14%3A41%3A00IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Motivational%20limitations%20on%20the%20demands%20of%20justice&rft.jtitle=European%20journal%20of%20political%20theory&rft.au=Wiens,%20David&rft.date=2016-07&rft.volume=15&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=333&rft.epage=352&rft.pages=333-352&rft.issn=1474-8851&rft.eissn=1741-2730&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/1474885115578446&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1801772051%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1801772051&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_sage_id=10.1177_1474885115578446&rfr_iscdi=true |