Martha Nussbaum

Prinjato schitat, chto emotsii i politika - eto opasnoe sochetanie, svojstvennoe iskljuchitelno agressivnym obschestvam. Marta Nussbaum v svoej knige stremitsja oprovergnut etot tezis i dokazat, chto ljubye politicheskie printsipy nuzhdajutsja v emotsionalnoj podderzhke. Ona ottalkivaetsja ot primera takikh liderov, kak Avraam Linkoln, Dzhavakharlal Neru i Martin Ljuter King - mladshij, sumevshikh svjazat politicheskie emotsii so stremlenijami ko vseobschemu miru i spravedlivosti, a ne s voinstvennymi proektami, napravlennymi protiv drugikh natsij. Avtor obraschaetsja i k rezultatam antropologicheskikh issledovanij, kotorye utverzhdajut, chto sklonnost k vystraivaniju pagubnykh ierarkhij i diskriminatsii ukorenena v chelovecheskoj prirode, no predlagaet protivopostavit etim sklonnostjam kultivirovanie ljubvi i rasshirennogo sostradanija - snachala k svoim sograzhdanam, a zatem i k predstaviteljam drugikh natsij. Glavnymi instrumentami v kultivirovanii etikh chuvstv dolzhny stat razlichnye vidy publichnogo iskusstva - ot poem, romanov, pamjatnikov i memorialov do filmov Bollivuda. Marta Nussbaum - filosof, professor Chikagskogo universiteta.Perevodchik: Porfireva S.

I dette centrale værk fra en af verdens førende filosoffer undersøges vrede og tilgivelse, og begge begreber sættes gennem Nussbaums indsigtsfulde analyse i et forbløffende nyt lys. Vrede kan både være personligt og politisk drevet, og mens mange tror, at retfærdigheden ikke kan værnes om uden vrede over uretfærdigheden, viser og advarer Nussbaum mod en destruktiv side af vreden.Nussbaum undersøger vreden både i intime relationer, dagligdags interaktioner, på arbejdspladsen, i det strafferetlige system og i bevægelser for social forandring. Værket er således et værktøj, vi har akut brug for til at forstå tidens protestbevægelser, og hvordan de kan føre til reel forandring og ikke kun forbitrelse.“Martha C. Nussbaum er den største nulevende filosof.”Svend Brinkmann

When the noted political philosopher Iris Marion Young died in 2006, her death was mourned as the passing of "one of the most important political philosophers of the past quarter-century" (Cass Sunstein) and as an important and innovative thinker working at the conjunction of a number of important topics: global justice; democracy and difference; continental political theory; ethics and international affairs; and gender, race and public policy. In her long-awaited Responsibility for Justice, Young discusses our responsibilities to address "structural" injustices in which we among many are implicated (but for which we not to blame), often by virtue of participating in a market, such as buying goods produced in sweatshops, or participating in booming housing markets that leave many homeless. Young argues that addressing these structural injustices requires a new model of responsibility, which she calls the "social connection" model. She develops this idea by clarifying the nature of structural injustice; developing the notion of political responsibility for injustice and how it differs from older ideas of blame and guilt; and finally how we can then use this model to describe our responsibilities to others no matter who we are and where we live. With a foreward by Martha C. Nussbaum, this last statement by a revered and highly influential thinker will be of great interest to political theorists and philosophers, ethicists, and feminist and political philosophers.

When the noted political philosopher Iris Marion Young died in 2006, her death was mourned as the passing of "one of the most important political philosophers of the past quarter-century" (Cass Sunstein) and as an important and innovative thinker working at the conjunction of a number of important topics: global justice; democracy and difference; continental political theory; ethics and international affairs; and gender, race and public policy. In her long-awaited RESPONSIBILITY FOR JUSTICE, Young discusses our responsibilities to address "structural" injustices in which we among many are implicated (but for which we not to blame), often by virtue of participating in a market, such as buying goods produced in sweatshops, or participating in booming housing markets that leave many homeless. Young argues that addressing these structural injustices requires a new model of responsibility, which she calls the "social connection" model. She develops this idea by clarifying the nature of structural injustice; developing the notion of political responsibility for injustice and how it differs from older ideas of blame and guilt; and finally how we can then use this model to describe our responsibilities to others no matter who we are and where we live. With a foreword by Martha C. Nussbaum, this last statement by a revered and highly influential thinker will be of great interest to political theorists and philosophers, ethicists, and feminist and political philosophers. 'Iris Marion Young's death in 2006 was a tragic loss for the field of political theory, and this manuscript is evidence of how much she had yet to contribute. Like all her work, it addresses issues of enormous philosophical and political importance, and does so in a way that is original and insightful. It integrates a rich array of examples, concepts, theories and resources, from empirical social science to continental philosophy, and does so in a way that is seamless and effortless... it's an important manuscript and a fitting testament to Young's career."- Will Kymlicka, Philosophy, Queens University '[The book] is both very distinctively the work of Iris Marion Young in its topic, style of argument and presentation, but it also makes a number of important contributions to contemporary political philosophy, through trying to work out a 'social connection' theory of responsibility. It is particularly impressive in the open way it draws on sources - equally at home discussing Derrida, Sartre and Levinas, as contemporary analytic philosophers such as G.A. Cohen, Alan Buchanan and Robert Goodin.' Jonathan Wolff, Philosophy, University College London

The respect for religious difference has formed the bedrock of our nation and made equality possible. Yet today we are told that moral values",code for a government shaped by religious concerns,must be the keystone of our social compact. A rich and compelling chronicle of an essential idea, Liberty of Conscience tells the story of America's great tradition of religious freedom. Philosopher Martha Nussbaum's ambitious book is both a work of history and a pointed rejoinder to conservative efforts to break down barriers between church and state.

Libertarianism: For and Against offers dueling perspectives on the scope of legitimate government. Tibor R. Machan, a well-known political philosopher with libertarian convictions, argues for a minimal government devoted solely to protecting individual rights to life, liberty, and property. Stressing the sovereignty of each individual, Machan argues in favor of limiting democracy's scope and against the redistribution of wealth, or any other sort of taxation. In opposition to libertarianism, philosopher Craig Duncan defends democratic liberalism, which aims to ensure that all citizens have fair access to a life of dignity. This requires measures to protect equality of opportunity, as well as measures to ensure all have access to a decent minimum standard of living. In a dynamic exchange of arguments, critiques, and rebuttals, the two philosophers cut to the heart of this important debate, articulating and defending competing conceptions of such core values as political freedom and equality.

Libertarianism: For and Against offers dueling perspectives on the scope of legitimate government. Tibor R. Machan, a well-known political philosopher with libertarian convictions, argues for a minimal government devoted solely to protecting individual rights to life, liberty, and property. Stressing the sovereignty of each individual, Machan argues in favor of limiting democracy's scope and against the redistribution of wealth, or any other sort of taxation. In opposition to libertarianism, philosopher Craig Duncan defends democratic liberalism, which aims to ensure that all citizens have fair access to a life of dignity. This requires measures to protect equality of opportunity, as well as measures to ensure all have access to a decent minimum standard of living. In a dynamic exchange of arguments, critiques, and rebuttals, the two philosophers cut to the heart of this important debate, articulating and defending competing conceptions of such core values as political freedom and equality.