I’m about to start teaching a new course on global justice. The course starts by looking at some general theoretical issues around justice and then moves on to look at some recent attempts to extend thinking about justice to the global sphere. I’m also going to accompany this with a blog which will basically be an opportunity to point to relevant stuff elsewhere on the web as well as being a course noticeboard. The reading list is “here”:http://eis.bris.ac.uk/%7Eplcdib/tj.html and the blog (currently empty) is “here”:http://rousseau.typepad.com/globaljustice/ .
{ 17 comments }
Robin Grant 01.19.05 at 11:41 am
Chris
You might find these sites useful as resources:
perfect.co.uk / Global Justice
Our word is our weapon
Paul Kingsnorth
Matt 01.19.05 at 1:00 pm
It looks like a good class. I’m especially glad to see you’re using some of KC Tan’s new book, which, from the parts I’ve read, look to be excellent. In your section about migration and nationality I suggest looking at the paper by Steven Perry in the volume _Justice in Immigration_, from the Cambridge philosophy of law series some years ago. The book all together is very good, perhaps a bit better than the Goodin and Barry volume, but is terribly priced, something like $80. The recent volume of the Fordham Law review devoted to Rawls also has some interesting looking papers on Law of Peoples, (Benhabib, against, and Macedo, for) but I’ve not read them yet so can’t say how good they are.
Russell Arben Fox 01.19.05 at 4:52 pm
I can only assume that you considered it and then passed it over, Chris, but just in case: nothing from Global Justice: NOMOS XLI (NYU, 1999)? Many excellent essays therein, by Brian Barry among others.
Great looking sites. One of these days I’m going to need to plan ahead far enough to construct online resources for my classes too. I’m sure it’ll be a rewarding seminar for all involved.
Chris Bertram 01.19.05 at 6:11 pm
Thanks for the tips Robin.
Yes, there are some good items in that volume Russell, especially a piece by Debra Satz as I recall. But I’ve tried as far as I can to make the reading accessible via JSTOR, Ingenta or whatever. That way, the students aren’t competing for scarce library resources.
Tim 01.19.05 at 6:14 pm
Chris, another very good edited collection is Pogge’s Global Justice (2001) published by Blackwell. It originally appeared as Metaphilosophy, vol. 32, no. 1-2 (so your students need only download the PDF articles).
Another useful web resource is the Carnegie Council for Ethics and International Affairs website. Incidentally, I didn’t see any readings from Ethics & International Affairs (the journal); any particular reason?
djw 01.19.05 at 6:21 pm
Good looking course. I didn’t love the Moellendorf book, but it does seem to inspire some good discussion. The August 2004 volume of Theoria is devoted to the book, and has some excellent critical essays, IMO.
I often wonder–if The Law of Peoples had been written by someone we’d never heard of, would it have such a prominent place in this discussion? Of course, you kind of have to do it now, even if you think it sucks, because it has set the tone for the conversation, any many much better theories of global justice are starting with Rawls, in particular the tension between pre-LoP Rawls and the LoP. Still, I can’t help but suspect that that book would’ve been largely ignored had it been written by someone like Bob Smith.
Matt 01.19.05 at 7:12 pm
DJW,
Let me disagree w/ you on LP- it got quite a harsh reaction when it came out, but then, if you look back, there was also quite a lot of very negative work done on TJ and PL when they first came out, too, and now much of that early work looks a bit silly. I think something similar is happening/will happen w/ LP as well. It’s clearly Rawls’s most schematic and less well developed book, for reasons of health, mostly, but it’s also not as bad as people think, and is much more closely connected to the early work than most early commentors think or appreciate. As this becomes clear, I think there will be a differing reaction, with, for some, it causing them to rethink Rawls’s whole approach, and for others leading to more of an acceptence of the LP approach. Macedo’s paper I mentioned above is a good place to look at this sort of change, as is a recent paper by Joseph Heath and some forthcoming work by Sam Freeman.
Russell Arben Fox 01.19.05 at 7:44 pm
I, for one, think The Law of Peoples is actually a better book than Theories of Justice or Political Liberalism–though, admittedly, since the former is really just a monograph which assumes the sort of issues which the other two books were obliged to argue out at length, it’s kind of hard to compare. But for example, I can make much better sense of what Rawls’s is doing with Kant in LP than in his earlier work (but perhaps that just reveals to importance I attach to the history of political philosophy over normative/analytical work).
Chris Bertram 01.20.05 at 10:49 am
Thanks for the suggestions people, I’ll try to investigate them.
conrad barwa 01.20.05 at 12:06 pm
Looks like a nice course; I would strongly recommend Robert Wade’s excellent articles on Globalisation and Inequality:
http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/DESTIN/pdf/Isglobreducing.pdf
http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/DESTIN/pdf/NewPolEcon.9_2_04.pdf
probably a bit on the applied side for a theoretical course but well worth looking into. Also I know he might be persona non grata in some eyes, by the short ideas-book series published by Polity has a good volume on Equality by Callinicos, which is good on summarising various arguements from different quarter. It might be of particular interest as he spends a lot of time looking at Rawls (not all that convincingly but still) as well as Sen.
h. e. baber 01.20.05 at 5:10 pm
I, in philosophy, team taught a course with an economist on the economics and ethics of gender in the developing world. The reading list includes lots of links material and there are also links to resources for data and empirical stuff. I also have a reading list with lots of links for a reader on Global Ethics, not primarily on gender issues. Lots of the links are to recent reports from UN agencies, World Bank, IMF with data and analysis and also to pop stuff along with standard philosophical fare. The proposal is here. I”m trying to sell this and would welcome comments.
The course, and site, look beautiful–I wish it was around when we were putting together our course!
Chris Bertram 01.21.05 at 2:11 pm
Like the reader and the the proposal, thanks! I had two small suggestions for your reader/proposal: maybe something explicitly on intergenerational justice? And (completely unrelated) I think Orwell’s essay On Shooting and Elephant would fit really nicely into the colonialism section.
harry 01.21.05 at 4:30 pm
HE — the reader looks great. I’d make two additions, both of which go aganst my own views. David Miler’s anti-cosmopolitan piece, In Defence of Nationality is worth having — its short, readable, and more complex than it appears to be on the surface. Second, Richard Miller’s piece on ‘Cosmoplitan Respect and Patriotic Concern’ (PPA 1999?) is worth having because he challenges the connection between universalism and cosmopolitanism. This is a much, and unjustly, neglected piece imho. I’d include them both in the first section.
Just a suggestion — maybe you shouldn’t take it up, because these things can get unwieldy quickly.
djw 01.21.05 at 9:51 pm
Speaking of Millers, they both have excellent essays in The Ethics of Assistance: Morality and the Distant Needy, Deen Chatterjee, ed (CUP, 2004). David is continuing the work done by his Ethics essay from last year, working on the concept of national responsibility. Richard’s essay, “Moral Closeness and World Community” is one of the best essays I’ve seen make the case that community/local ties aren’t at odds with global or cosmopolitan notions of duty or responsibility, but rather make such ideas possible.
Matt/Russell: hmm. I’ve never been able to get past the notion that LP Rawls places way too much stock in his notion of ‘societies.’ I suppose it’s worth a reread; I certainly came to appreciate TJ a good deal more on subsequent readings.
Judith Lichtenberg 01.22.05 at 2:46 am
Take a look also at Peter Singer’s recent book, One World: The Ethics of Globalization, 2d. ed. (Yale, 2002). I used it in an international ethics course I taught this past semester. It covers a broad range of central topics lucidly, and it’s short and cheap! (My syllabus is at http://www.puaf.umd.edu/faculty/papers/lichtenberg/international%20ethics/IEsyllabus%20fall04.doc.)
Matt 01.22.05 at 2:53 pm
DJW,
I’ll take a look at the Miller(s) pieces. I’ve never found the nationalist Miller a bit convincing, though. As for societies in LP, if you look back, they have the same role in TJ and PL- that’s what I mean by the continuity. You have to _radically_ change the picture in TJ and especially PL to not get the picture in LP, though most people miss-read this. It’s the same basic idea of society doing the work, at least in PL and LP, and close to it in TJ.
djw 01.22.05 at 6:32 pm
Right, I’ll happily concede that about societies. I just felt like the nature of the problem he was tackling would be well served by a rethinking of some of those assumptions.
I’ve never been much of a fan of D. Miller’s normative nationalism either, but I do think two of his recent pieces–the one above and the 2004 Ethics piece (also, to a lesser extent, the 2001 JPP essay on Distributing Responsibilities), taken together, are an interesting and important part of the emerging discussion on responsibility in a global context. Actually, I’m currently hard at work on a conference paper explaining how one aspect of Miller’s recent work (on responsibility) can plausibly be read in a way that undermines another aspect of his work (his normative defense of nationalism and critique of cosmopolitanism)
Comments on this entry are closed.