The Idea of JusticeAmartya Sen Cambridge, MA: Belknap, 2009, 496 pp. ISBN-13: 978-0674036130
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A Cosmopolitan Account , a monograph by Gillian Brock launched in the summer of 2009, makes a high quality contribution to the body of philosophical work on global justice.As its title suggests, the book offers a vision of global justice from a cosmopolitan perspective.What makes the vision cosmopolitan, of course, is the appeal to the ideal of moral equality of all persons as the starting point of a philosophical inquiry into matters concerning justice on a global scale.With this ideal as its starting point, the author offers a theoretical approach, discusses various substantive issues, and situates both the theory and its implications for substantive issues in relation to the larger literature on the subject.The book is structured in a slightly unusual way.This is, in fact, a feature of the book that makes it very attractive.It has become commonplace in recent years to start a piece of work on global justice with empirical data on global poverty, and then derive an obligation of justice that prescribes economic sacrifi ces to alleviate global poverty to individuals of affl uent (and mostly Western) countries.Sometimes, the justifi cation for this obligation appeals to claims that members of affl uent countries are in fact responsible, one way or another, for global poverty.The book avoids this structure and starts clearly and unapologetically with normative theory itself.The empirical considerations are taken up along the way and substantive issues are discussed after the basic components of the normative theory are articulated.This is followed by a reconsideration of the theoretical normative questions.To refl ect this dialectic, the book is divided into three parts.Part I proposes a theory of cosmopolitan justice.It offers an introduction to the debates and an elucidation of the author's theoretical position on global justice.In doing so, the author articulates an alternative theoretical approach in relation to other positions that have been developed in the literature.Simply called "Theory", this part contains four chapters: an introductory chapter, a chapter devoted exclusively to the debate around Rawls's Law of Peoples , a chapter that articulates the author's proposed theoretical framework, and a
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".