Making Capability Lists: Philosophy versus Democracy

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

The article discusses a fundamental problem that has to be faced if the general capability approach is to be developed in the direction of a theory of justice: the selection and justification of a list of capabilities. The democratic solution to this problem (defended by Amartya Sen) is to leave the selection of capabilities to a process of democratic deliberation, while the philosophical solution (defended by Martha Nussbaum) is to establish this list of capabilities as a matter of philosophical theory. The article investigates the debate between these two different positions and argues in favour of the philosophical solution. First, it distinguishes political from epistemological reasons for (not) making capability lists. Second, it shows that the democratic position must incorporate at least some philosophical theorising in general and a theory of democracy in particular. Third, the article argues that the democratic position presupposes
that the philosophical position will bypass the democratic process while actually it does not. The philosophical position is actually more respectful of democracy than the democratic position. Fourth, while philosophers may exercise caution and connect their capability lists to actual democratic debates and other empirical sources, this kind of epistemological virtue ironically may heighten the chance of receiving reproaches on the political level.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)491-508
Number of pages18
JournalPolitical Studies
Volume59
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2011

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Making Capability Lists: Philosophy versus Democracy'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this