Beyond distribution: Honneth’s ethical theory of justice

Authors

  • Louis Carré l’Université Libre de Bruxelles

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15448/1984-7289.2015.4.22524

Keywords:

Axel Honneth. Theory of justice. Distribution. Recognition. Freedom. Democracy. John Rawls.

Abstract

In this paper, the author considers the critique that Axel Honneth has formulated against the distributive model of justice for which Rawls is one of the most important theoretical representatives today. After having outlined the three main limits of the “distributive paradigm” (in terms of proceduralism, atomism, and state-centrism), he then discusses Honneth’s counter-model of justice. Honneth’s “ethical” theory of justice consists in a “normative recognition” of the “institutions of recognition” that allows individuals to experience certain forms of “social freedom” based on mutual recognition. As a conclusion, the author deals with some of the difficulties associated with Honneth’s “ethical” theory of justice.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Cohen, G. (2008), Rescuing Justice and Equality, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.

Fraser, N., Honneth, A. (2003), Redistribution or Recognition? A Political-Philosophical Exchange, Verson, London and New-York.

Habermas, J. (1998), Between Facts and Norms. Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy, MIT Press, Boston.

Hegel, G.W.F. (1991), Elements of the Philosophy of Right, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Honneth, A. (2012), “The Fabric of Justice. On the Limits of Contemporary Proceduralism”, in The I in the We. Studies on the Theory of Recognition, Polity Press, Cambridge, p. 35-55.

Honneth, A. (2014), Freedom’s Right. The Social Foundations of Democratic Life, Columbia University Press, New-York.

Jütten, T. (2015), “Is the Market a Sphere of Social Freedom?”, Critical Horizons, vol. 16, n°2, p. 187-203.

Macpherson, C.B. (1973), Democratic Theory. Essays in retrieval, Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Miller, D. (2001), Principles of Social Justice, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.

Neuhouser, F. (2000), Foundations of Hegel’s social theory: actualizing freedom, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.

Pateman, C. (1988), The Sexual Contract, Stanford University Press, Stanford.

Polanyi, K. (1957), “The economy as instituted process”, in Polanyi, K., Arensberg, C. M., Trade and Market in the Early Empires, Chicago, p. 243-270.

Rawls, J. (1999), A Theory of Justice, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.

Sandel, M. (1982), Liberalism and the Limits of Justice, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Taylor, C. (1985a), “Atomism’, in Philosophy and the Human Sciences. Philosophical Papers 2, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p. 187-210.

Taylor, C. (1985b), “The nature and scope of distributive justice”, in Philosophy and the Human Sciences. Philosophical Papers 2, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p. 289-317.

Okin, S. M. (1989), Justice, Gender and the Family, Basic Books, New-York.

Walzer, M. (1983), Spheres of Justice. A Defense of Pluralism and Equality, Basic Books, New-York.

Young, I.M. (1990), Justice and the Politics of Difference, Princeton University Press, Princeton.

Young, I.M. (2007), “Recognition of Love’s Labor. Reconsidering Axel Honneth’s Feminism”, in van den Brink, B., Owen, D. (ed.), Recognition and Power. Axel Honneth and the Tradition of Critical Theory, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p. 189-213.

Downloads

Published

2016-03-01

How to Cite

Carré, L. (2016). Beyond distribution: Honneth’s ethical theory of justice. Civitas: Journal of Social Sciences, 15(4), 619–630. https://doi.org/10.15448/1984-7289.2015.4.22524

Issue

Section

Justice and social institutions in democracy