Affiliation:
1. Institute of Political Science, Leiden University , Turfmarkt 99 2511 DP The Hague , Netherlands
Abstract
Abstract
How much should we sacrifice for the sake of others? While some argue in favour of significant sacrifices, others contend that morality cannot demand too much from individuals. Recently, the debate has taken a new turn by focusing on moral demands under non-ideal conditions in which the essential interests of many people are set back. Under such conditions, in some views, moral theories must require extreme moral demands as anything less is incompatible with equal consideration of everyone’s interests. The insistence on the extremeness of moral demands, however, presupposes a simplistic account of non-ideal conditions as characterized mainly by the non-compliance of many individuals. Non-ideal conditions are also characterized by institutional non-compliance, whereby institutions often do not do what they ought to do. Institutional non-compliance is significant as it increases the size of moral demands significantly, thereby exacerbating the conflict between these demands and the self-interest of individuals subjected to these institutions. I argue that individuals have a meta-interest in not experiencing such internal conflicts as these can undermine their affirmation of self-respect. Meta-interest can be advanced by adopting the promotion of just institutions as an ultimate aim, as such institutions lessen the conflict and, accordingly, enable us to live more harmonious lives. Moreover, the promotion of just institutions allows us to affirm our sense of self-respect under non-ideal conditions too. Because the promotion of just institutions is in our self-interest, this is not an extreme but a moderate moral demand.
Subject
History and Philosophy of Science,Sociology and Political Science,Philosophy
Reference38 articles.
1. Abizadeh, A. 2008. “Democratic Theory and Border Coercion No Right to Unilaterally Control Your Own Borders.” Political Theory 36 (1): 37–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591707310090.
2. Bandura, A. 2015. Moral Disengagement: How People Do Harm and Live with Themselves, 1st ed, 2016 edition. New York: Worth Publishers.
3. Batson, C. D. 2010. “Toward a Pluralism of Prosocial Motives—and a More Humane Society.” In Altruism in Humans, 208–28. Oxford: Oxford University Presshttps://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195341065.003.0010.
4. Belic, J. 2017. “When the Practice Gets Complicated: Human Rights, Migrants and Political Institutions.” In Moral and Political Conceptions of Human Rights: Implications for Theory and Practice, edited by R. Maliks, and J. Schafer, 157–80. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5. Belic, J., and Z. Bozac. forthcoming. “Structural Injustice, Shared Obligations, and Global Civil Society.” Social Theory and Practice.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献