A thesis about individual responsibility for collective action problems and more specifically anthropogenic global climate change. This thesis tries to refute claims made by Walter Sinnott...Show moreA thesis about individual responsibility for collective action problems and more specifically anthropogenic global climate change. This thesis tries to refute claims made by Walter Sinnott-Armstrong on individual causal inefficacy.Show less
One of the central debates in international justice is about the scope of principles of distributive justice. Liberal statists endorse a relationist approach and claim that principles of justice1...Show moreOne of the central debates in international justice is about the scope of principles of distributive justice. Liberal statists endorse a relationist approach and claim that principles of justice1 are only applicable in domestic set-tings while cosmopolitans argue for a broader nonrelationist applicability of these principles in the international sphere. I will acknowledge that the state has normative peculiarity but also claim that there are other grounds of justice, both relational and nonrelational, that plea for more demanding general obligations of justice towards other peoples or states. These duties are based on principles of justice since they are more stringent and en-forceable than current statist views on foreign policies. I will oppose the narrow statist view and argue instead for a broader application of principles of justice. Relying on grounds or domains of justice allows us to leave the unilateral discussion between relationists (statists) and nonrelationists (cosmopolitans) for both do not succeed in capturing an accurate, complete account of international justice. Distinguishing different grounds of justice will show how the exact nature of a relationship determines what principles of justice are applicable for which agents. I will also show how this alternative approach is helpful in the challenging debate of noncompliance and questions on who is to pick up the slack that is left by noncomplying agents. The main argument I will thus make is that liberal statists have reasons to endorse more demanding international duties of justice. My aim is twofold: first to show inconsistencies in statist theory and second to explain how statist approaches are compatible with endorsing other, more demanding duties of global justice.Show less
This thesis critically analyses the success of John Rawls’s political liberalism, which recast his theory of justice from a comprehensive doctrine to a political conception. This analysis into...Show moreThis thesis critically analyses the success of John Rawls’s political liberalism, which recast his theory of justice from a comprehensive doctrine to a political conception. This analysis into Rawlsian political liberalism involves an examination of the way in which political liberals have responded to the objections raised by critics of the theory. Through analysing the problem of asymmetry in political liberalism, this thesis argues that political liberalism is only able to remain viable on the basis of the notion of reasonableness, which characterises the group of highly idealised, reasonable citizens. These citizens are immensely important to political liberalism, since they have the role of deliberating on and justifying the political conception of justice. In order for political liberalism to remain a tenable account of how agreement can be reached on the principles of justice, the idea of reasonableness requires justification. Political liberals attempt to accomplish this by appealing to the public political culture, and the shared political ideas found within it, which all democratically-aligned citizens will endorse. This thesis also argues that such a claim cannot be made, since the political ideas are subject to interpretation and thus not shared. It is also illustrated that political liberals cannot ground their theory in the support of committed democrats, since disagreement over the ideas of democracy and reasonableness are likely. After concluding that political liberalism cannot be defended, the last chapter of this thesis focuses upon a perfectionist liberalism, which Rawls argues must be rejected. This thesis argues that, on the contrary, perfectionist liberalism may be able to overcome the problems that political liberals associate with it.Show less
