Global justice
From The Art and Popular Culture Encyclopedia
| Revision as of 10:46, 22 January 2016 Jahsonic (Talk | contribs) ← Previous diff |
Current revision Jahsonic (Talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| - | {{Template}} | + | {| class="toccolours" style="float: left; margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 2em; font-size: 85%; background:#c6dbf7; color:black; width:30em; max-width: 40%;" cellspacing="5" |
| + | | style="text-align: left;" | | ||
| + | "[[Think globally, act locally]]." | ||
| + | |}{{Template}} | ||
| - | '''Cultural relativism''' is the principle that an individual [[human]]'s [[belief]]s and activities should be understood by others in terms of that individual's own [[culture]]. This principle was established as [[axiom]]atic in [[anthropology|anthropological]] research by [[Franz Boas]] in the first few decades of the 20th century and later popularized by his students. Boas first articulated the idea in 1887: "...[[civilization]] is not something [[absolute]], but ... is relative, and ... our ideas and conceptions are true only so far as our civilization goes." but did not actually coin the term "cultural relativism." | + | '''Global justice''' is an issue in [[political philosophy]] arising from the concern about [[unfairness]]. It is sometimes understood as a form of [[internationalism]]. |
| + | == History == | ||
| + | [[Global]] [[ethics]] and [[international justice]] in western tradition is part of the tradition of [[natural law]]. It has been organized and taught within Western culture since Latin times of Middle [[Stoa]] and [[Cicero]] and the early Christian philosophers [[Ambrose]] and [[Augustine]]. | ||
| + | What we owe one another in the global context is one of the questions the global justice concept seeks to answer. There are positive and negative duties which may be in conflict with ones moral rules. [[Cosmopolitanism|Cosmopolitans]], reportedly including the ancient Greek [[Diogenes of Sinope]], have described themselves as ''citizens of the world''. | ||
| - | Cultural relativism involves specific [[epistemology|epistemological]] and methodological claims. Whether or not these claims necessitate a specific [[ethics|ethical]] stance is a matter of debate. Nevertheless, this principle should not be confused with [[moral relativism]]. | + | [[Utilitarianism|Utilitarian]] thinker and [[Anarchism|anarchist]] [[William Godwin]] argued that everyone has an impartial duty to do the most good he or she can, without preference for any one human being over another. |
| - | ==See also== | + | |
| - | *[[Emotivism]] | + | |
| - | *[[Ethnocentrism]] | + | |
| - | *[[Global justice]] | + | |
| - | *[[Historical particularism]] | + | |
| - | *[[Intercultural competence]] | + | |
| - | *[[Moral purchasing]] | + | |
| - | *[[Moral relativism]] | + | |
| - | *[[Relativism]] | + | |
| - | *[[Situational ethics]] | + | |
| - | *[[Xenocentrism]] | + | |
| - | *[[How to Observe Morals and Manners]] | + | |
| - | ==Case: humour== | + | The broader political context of the debate is the longstanding conflict between more and less local institutions: tribes against states, villages against cities, local communities against empires, nation-states against the [[United Nations|UN]]. The relative strength of the local versus the global has waxed and waned over recorded history. From the [[early modern period]] until the twentieth century, the preeminent political institution was the [[Sovereign state|state]], which is [[Sovereignty|sovereign]], territorial, claims a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence in its territory, and exists in an international system of other sovereign states. Over the same period, and relatedly, political philosophers' interest in [[justice]] focused almost exclusively on [[Domestic policy|domestic]] issues: how should states treat their subjects, and what do fellow-[[citizen]]s owe one another? Justice in relations between states, and between individuals across state borders was put aside as a secondary issue or left to [[international relations]] theorists. |
| - | A '''sense of humour''' is the ability to experience humour, although the extent to which an individual will find something humorous depends on a host of [[variable]]s, including [[geographical location]], [[culture]], [[Maturity (psychological)|maturity]], level of [[education]], [[intelligence]], and [[context]]. For example, young children may possibly favour [[slapstick]], such as [[Punch and Judy]] puppet shows or cartoons (e.g., [[Tom and Jerry]]). [[Satire]] may rely more on understanding the target of the humour, and thus tends to appeal to more mature audiences. | + | |
| + | Since the [[World War I|First World War]], however, the state system has been transformed by [[globalization]] and by the creation of [[International organization|supranational]] political and economic institutions such as the [[League of Nations]], the United Nations, and the [[World Bank]]. Over the same period, and especially since the 1970s, global justice became an important issue in political philosophy. In the contemporary global justice debate, the general issue of impartiality centers on the moral significance of borders and of shared citizenship. [[Realism in international relations|Realist]]s, [[Epistemological particularism|particularist]]s, [[nationalist]]s, members of the [[society of states tradition]], and cosmopolitans take contesting positions in response to these problems. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==See also == | ||
| + | *[[Alter-globalization]] | ||
| + | *[[Anti-globalization]] | ||
| + | *[[Language tax]] | ||
| + | *[[Cosmopolitanism]] | ||
| + | *[[Democratic globalization]] | ||
| + | *[[Democratic World Federalists]] | ||
| + | *[[European Social Forum]] | ||
| + | *[[World Social Forum]] | ||
| + | *[[Global civics]] | ||
| + | *[[Global citizenship]] | ||
| + | *[[Global Justice (organization)]] | ||
| + | *[[Global justice movement]] | ||
| + | *[[Human rights defender]] | ||
| + | *[[Just War]] | ||
| + | *[[Movement of Movements]] | ||
| + | *[[Rule According to Higher Law]] | ||
| + | *[[Rule of law]] | ||
| + | *[[Xenocentrism]] | ||
| + | *[[Theodicy]] | ||
| + | *[[Per Fugelli]] | ||
| {{GFDL}} | {{GFDL}} | ||
Current revision
|
Related e |
|
Featured: |
Global justice is an issue in political philosophy arising from the concern about unfairness. It is sometimes understood as a form of internationalism.
History
Global ethics and international justice in western tradition is part of the tradition of natural law. It has been organized and taught within Western culture since Latin times of Middle Stoa and Cicero and the early Christian philosophers Ambrose and Augustine.
What we owe one another in the global context is one of the questions the global justice concept seeks to answer. There are positive and negative duties which may be in conflict with ones moral rules. Cosmopolitans, reportedly including the ancient Greek Diogenes of Sinope, have described themselves as citizens of the world.
Utilitarian thinker and anarchist William Godwin argued that everyone has an impartial duty to do the most good he or she can, without preference for any one human being over another.
The broader political context of the debate is the longstanding conflict between more and less local institutions: tribes against states, villages against cities, local communities against empires, nation-states against the UN. The relative strength of the local versus the global has waxed and waned over recorded history. From the early modern period until the twentieth century, the preeminent political institution was the state, which is sovereign, territorial, claims a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence in its territory, and exists in an international system of other sovereign states. Over the same period, and relatedly, political philosophers' interest in justice focused almost exclusively on domestic issues: how should states treat their subjects, and what do fellow-citizens owe one another? Justice in relations between states, and between individuals across state borders was put aside as a secondary issue or left to international relations theorists.
Since the First World War, however, the state system has been transformed by globalization and by the creation of supranational political and economic institutions such as the League of Nations, the United Nations, and the World Bank. Over the same period, and especially since the 1970s, global justice became an important issue in political philosophy. In the contemporary global justice debate, the general issue of impartiality centers on the moral significance of borders and of shared citizenship. Realists, particularists, nationalists, members of the society of states tradition, and cosmopolitans take contesting positions in response to these problems.
See also
- Alter-globalization
- Anti-globalization
- Language tax
- Cosmopolitanism
- Democratic globalization
- Democratic World Federalists
- European Social Forum
- World Social Forum
- Global civics
- Global citizenship
- Global Justice (organization)
- Global justice movement
- Human rights defender
- Just War
- Movement of Movements
- Rule According to Higher Law
- Rule of law
- Xenocentrism
- Theodicy
- Per Fugelli
