Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Global justice as a concept should be rejected — Carmelics
    Home/Justice & Punishment
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Global justice as a concept should be rejected

    Democracy & GovernanceJustice & Punishment
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Political legitimacy ties obligations of justice to nation states
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Justice obligations cannot extend beyond the scope of legitimate political authority
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Rawls's 'Law of Peoples' acknowledges duties of assistance across borders, grounding global justice in liberal theory itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If legitimacy generates justice obligations, then international institutions (WTO, IMF) with coercive power generate global justice obligations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Pogge argues global institutions actively harm the poor through structural coercion, creating negative duties that transcend state boundaries.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Negative duties to not harm require no prior legitimate political authority—they arise from causal responsibility alone.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Justice & PunishmentDemocracy & Governance

    Related

    If legitimacy generates justice obligations, then international institutions (WT...Justice obligations cannot extend beyond the scope of legitimate political autho...Negative duties to not harm require no prior legitimate political authority—they...Pogge argues global institutions actively harm the poor through structural coerc...
    +2 moreShow less
    Political legitimacy ties obligations of justice to nation statesRawls's 'Law of Peoples' acknowledges duties of assistance across borders, groun...

    Similar

    Retributive justice is an appealing theory of punishment.80%Rawls explicitly rejects utilitarianism as a theory of justice.79%Sufficientarian justice does not require that an injustice consists in...79%The concept of justice essentially involves a right residing in an ind...79%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: legitimacy
    View source passageHide passage
    Political nationalism has had much influence on debates on global justice. Some have argued that because moral cosmopolitan commitments trump commitments to (national) legitimacy, a conception of global justice can be detached from concerns with legitimacy (Beitz 1979a,b, 1998; Pogge 2008). Others have argued—again assuming political nationalism—that legitimate authority at the level of the nation state is necessary to pursue moral cosmopolitan goals (Ypi 2008 provides an empirical argument). Ye
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit