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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:European journal of political theory 2016-07, Vol.15 (3), p.333-352
1. Verfasser: Wiens, David
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