Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Pogge's Cosmopolitan (GLOBAL ORDER: VIOLATION (EXAMPLE WTO (Shared…
Pogge's Cosmopolitan
Human Rights
recognition of inherent dignity; regardless whether these rights are recognized in their jurisdiction
Remedial responsibility
Positive duty: Singer
notions of charity, benevolence (provide and protect)
INTERACTIONAL ANALYSIS: what is my role as an individual human being towards the plight of other human beings?
STRONG PRINCIPLE: is that we ought to give until we reach the level of marginal utility - that is, the level at which, by giving more, would cause as much suffering to myself as I would relieve by my gift.
MODERATE PRINCIPLE: that we should prevent bad occurrences unless, to do so, we had to sacrifice something morally significant (= nothing wrong with luxuries per se, but needs need to be addressed first).
Negative duty: Pogge
-
-
-
INSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS: focusing on institutional injustices - caused by collectives of human agents thought the imposition of certain institutional arrangements
Corrective justice; rather than distributive justice: if person A wrongfully harms B, A must pay compensation for B
GLOBAL ORDER: VIOLATION
- alternative social institutions?
- foreseeably/avoidably Human Rights deficits?
-
CRITIQUE
-
CARCIA: undefined 'we' (institutions or human beings?) to whom the duty falls. Pogge does not specify specific agents.
-
-
- shared interconnected institutional network: shaped by the better off, and imposed on the worst-off
-
- order is unjust, when there is an alternative
- better-off enjoy advantages natural resources; worse-off are excluded
- inqualities can be traced back to historical wrongs (e.g. colonization, oppression and enslavement)
- If we violate their right, we do not respect persons as ends, but merely as means
-
- acts are right or wrong in themselves (not only looking at consequences)
-
- goes into actual policies