Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Amartya Sen "The Idea of Justice"
This is Sen's latest book.
Sen explained the contrast between the two approaches to justice as the difference between "niti" and "nyaya." "Niti," translated as "organizational propriety and correctness," refers to the institutions that should be created in order to have a just society. "Nyaya" on the other hand, translated as "a comprehensive idea of realized justice," is inescapably linked to the world and the lives of the people. Sen stated that the idea of justice in Holy Roman Emperor Ferdinand I's claim that justice ought to be done even though the world may perish, is that of "niti." However, justice done at the expense of a catastrophe in which the world may perish does not result in "nyaya."
IMO: OK, so his views are not those of Rawls. But he argues that even the Rawlsian/transcendentalist inquiry is not completely independent of the comparative approach to justice. He says people are seeking the removal of some outrageously unjust facts or rules in even the national or global society. As I see it, that explains why Muslims, for example, are so often in disagreement with one another. Sen says its best to reach a consensus, possibly so. The interesting point is that many people, apparently including Pres. Kalam, seem to see Sen as a (non-Indian) foreigner, brief discussion here. In a way I see myself as more of an Indian than Sen, and possibly the prosaic reason is simply Sen's rather obvious secular views, almost like an educated and civilised Dawkins. To me, a problem with almost all writing of that type, is that it seems to have embodied in its soul the concept of the US 'self-help' shelf of any large bookshop. But the work is worth reading, I imagine, as one assumes it clarifies many points.
Sen explained the contrast between the two approaches to justice as the difference between "niti" and "nyaya." "Niti," translated as "organizational propriety and correctness," refers to the institutions that should be created in order to have a just society. "Nyaya" on the other hand, translated as "a comprehensive idea of realized justice," is inescapably linked to the world and the lives of the people. Sen stated that the idea of justice in Holy Roman Emperor Ferdinand I's claim that justice ought to be done even though the world may perish, is that of "niti." However, justice done at the expense of a catastrophe in which the world may perish does not result in "nyaya."
IMO: OK, so his views are not those of Rawls. But he argues that even the Rawlsian/transcendentalist inquiry is not completely independent of the comparative approach to justice. He says people are seeking the removal of some outrageously unjust facts or rules in even the national or global society. As I see it, that explains why Muslims, for example, are so often in disagreement with one another. Sen says its best to reach a consensus, possibly so. The interesting point is that many people, apparently including Pres. Kalam, seem to see Sen as a (non-Indian) foreigner, brief discussion here. In a way I see myself as more of an Indian than Sen, and possibly the prosaic reason is simply Sen's rather obvious secular views, almost like an educated and civilised Dawkins. To me, a problem with almost all writing of that type, is that it seems to have embodied in its soul the concept of the US 'self-help' shelf of any large bookshop. But the work is worth reading, I imagine, as one assumes it clarifies many points.
# posted by uv : 4:41 AM
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
