Distributing responsibilities
Distributing responsibilities
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/1467-9760.00136
复制
发表时间：
2001-12-01
影响因子：
1.8
通讯作者：
Miller, D
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Miller, D
公正性在评价社会判断和社会安排中的作用在道德和政治哲学中得到了充分的承认。在这里，我想讨论两种完全不同的援引公正性的方式之间的基本区别。这些程序涉及对公正性要求的不同解释，因此可能产生相当不同的实质性影响。这两种方法将分别称为封闭和公开公正。这种区别取决于公正评估的活动是否局限于（或者更准确地说，试图局限于）一个固定的群体：我将称之为焦点群体。
The role of impartiality in the evaluation of social judgments and societal arrangements is well recognized in moral and political philosophy. Here, I want to discuss a basic distinction between two quite different ways of invoking impartiality. The procedures involve disparate interpretations of the demands of impartiality, and can correspondingly have rather dissimilar substantive implications. The two approaches will be called closed and open impartiality, respectively. The distinction turns on whether or not the exercise of impartial assessment is confined (or more accurately, attempted to be confined) to a fixed group: I shall call it the focal group.