Gottfried Schweiger

Both the capability and the recognition approach are influential and substantial theories in social philosophy. In this contribution, we outline their main assumptions in their assessment of poverty. The two approaches are set in relation to each other, focusing mainly on (a) their moral evaluation of poverty, (b) issues of justification of their central normative claims, and (c) the role that is attributed to subjective experiences, feelings and emotions in these theories. This comparison reveals that in spite of significant differences, both lead to the claim that poverty can never be adequately assessed without putting it into the context of a comprehensive ethical theory about the nature and function of societies. Drawing on this result, we conclude that the critical function of social philosophy plays an irreducible role in the study and understanding of poverty.

This brief introduction frames a guest-edited collection of eleven contributed articles in the Journal of Global Ethics focused on global justice and childhood. On a general level, there is widespread consensus that there is a strong need for improvement in the lives of children around the globe. What global justice demands in this regard, however, has never been fleshed out in detail and there is only a little philosophical literature on this topic. Against this background, five aspects of the question of global justice for children need to be addressed. First, one has to take into account the debate between cosmopolitanism and particularism, as well as the debate as to whether and to what extent individual, collective or institutional actors should be prioritized. Secondly, a theory of global justice for children must explain how the content of global justice for children is founded and justified, and what it comprises. Third, different principles can be used to assess global justice for children. Only two prominent alternatives are mentioned here: egalitarianism and sufficiency. Fourthly, the temporal dimension of global justice is of particular importance for children. Fifthly, an approach focusing on the examination of injustices is equally necessary.

Die philosophische Forschung zu Fragen der Armut hat zuletzt auch im deutschsprachigen Raum zugenommen. Im Fokus stehen dabei zumeist Fragen der Ethik und politischen Philosophie, etwa jene danach, worin das moralische Übel der Armut besteht oder nach der individuellen, kollektiven und institutionellen Verantwortung gegenüber Menschen in Armut. Die Aktualität der Armutsfrage ist dabei unbestritten sowohl im Hinblick auf ihr globales Ausmaß und die teils verheerenden Folgen für die betroffenen Personen als auch im Hinblick auf das Politikum Armut in entwickelten Wohlfahrtsstaaten. Das Ziel des Handbuchs ist es, den aktuellen Stand der philosophischen Forschung umfassend abzubilden. Dabei werden nicht nur die klassischen Fragestellungen der politischen Philosophie und Ethik behandelt, sondern auch jene aufgegriffen, die bislang weniger intensiv diskutiert wurden. Das betrifft etwa ethische Fragen der Armutsforschung oder die Verhandlung der Armut in den verschiedenen historischen Epochen und Strömungen.

Recognition and UnemploymentThis paper aims to explore the case of unemployment from the perspective of recognition theory as it was conceived by Axel Honneth. In the first part I present a shortened form of recognition theory and afterwards, in the second part, its take on work and labor in modern societies. Finally, the third part elaborates how unemployment can be understood and evaluated from this viewpoint. I argue that unemployment itself is not a form of misrecognition and therefore not moral evil. But what has to be criticized are the negative effects of unemployment and the degrading treatment of unemployed people.

Was macht ein Kind zu einem Kind? Sind Kinder ihren Eltern zur Dankbarkeit verpflichtet? Ist die Schulpflicht eine legitime staatliche Vorgabe? Gibt es ein Recht darauf, Kinder zu haben? Das Handbuch liefert einen systematischen Überblick über die zentralen Konzepte und Theorien sowie die wichtigsten Diskussionsfelder der Philosophie der Kindheit. Zur Debatte stehen neben dem moralischen, rechtlichen und politischen Status von Kindern auch Fragen nach dem instrumentellen oder intrinsischen Wert der Kindheit sowie nach historischen Veränderungen im gesellschaftlichen Umgang mit Kindern.

This book explores the relationship between different versions of liberalism and toleration by focusing on their shared theoretical and political challenges. Toleration is among the most pivotal and the most contested liberal values and virtues. Debates about the conceptual scope, justification, and political role of toleration are closely aligned with historical and contemporary philosophical controversies on the foundations of liberalism. The essays in this volume focus on the specific connection between toleration and liberalism. The essays in Part I reconstruct some of the major historical controversies surrounding toleration and liberalism. Part II centers on general conceptual and justificatory questions concerning toleration as a central category for the definition of liberal political theory. Part III is devoted to the theoretical analysis of applied issues and cases of conflicts of toleration in liberal states and societies. Toleration and the Challenges to Liberalism will be of interest to researchers and advanced students in social and political philosophy, ethics, and political theory.

This book brings together philosophical, social-theoretical and empirically oriented contributions on the philosophical and socio-theoretical debate on migration and integration, using the instruments of recognition as a normative and social-scientific category. Furthermore, the theoretical and practical implications of recognition theory are reflected through the case of migration. Migration movements, refugees and the associated tensions are phenomena that have become the focus of scientific, political and public debate in recent years. Migrants, in particular refugees, face many injustices and are especially vulnerable, but the right-wing political discourse presents them as threats to social order and stability. This book shows what a critical theory of recognition can contribute to the debate. The book is suitable for researchers in philosophy, social theory and migration research. "A profound examination of how states and societies struggle to recognize migrants as fellow human beings in all their fullness. The contributions are exceptional for combining astute philosophy and social theory with a discussion of actual politics and real lives." Dr. Hugo Slim “This impressive and timely volume offers an innovative way of understanding the issues of migration and integration by using a critical theory of recognition. Recognition theory has rich potential for effectively responding to the issues of autonomy, identity, integration, and empowerment that are at the core of the current public debates on mass migration, displacement, and the refugee crisis. By examining the normative and policy implications of recognition as they apply to migration, the book offers a pathbreaking look at the human dimension of the debate.” Dr. Helle Porsdam

What significance should the subjective experiences of poor people have in a normative philosophical critique of poverty? In this paper, we take up this question and answer it by looking at two different normative theories: the capability approach of Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum and the recognition approach of Axel Honneth. While Sen and Nussbaum are largely quite reluctant toward the role of subjective experiences of poor people, the recognition approach views them as central for its social critique of poverty. We will defend the thesis that a more inclusive view on the role of the subjects of suffering and injustice is needed, that such subjective experiences and the unique first-hand knowledge it produces cannot be substituted by objective criteria, while such criteria are needed to bolster – and in some cases also criticize – the poverty knowledge of poor people

Children are affected by poverty more often than adults, and growing up in poverty has severe and long-lasting negative consequences for a child’s well-being. How-ever, children are also in a very weak position, both to escape poverty on their own and to publicly and politically enforce their claims to a better life. Accordingly, children living in poverty are victims of two intersecting forms of powerlessness: they are children and they are poor. In this article, we analyze this particular type of powerlessness from a children’s rights perspective and argue that, in order to effectively restore justice to children in pov-erty, the State has to implement a comprehensive children’s rights regime. We argue that the State is obliged to consider children’s best interests in all its policies – even those that are not directly related to children – in order to compensate for the lack of political agency during childhood. This demand reflects the particular social and political status of children, namely: that they are dependent on others for their well-being, that childhood is a phase of particular vulnerability and that (young) children lack certain competencies that are needed to enforce their claims.

Der Status subjektiver Erfahrungen von Betroffenen für eine normative Bewertung von Armut ist unklar. Exemplarisch lassen sich zwei Richtungen unterscheiden: (a) die These, dass arme Menschen keine zuverlässigen Auskunftsgeber über das moralische Gewicht ihrer Lebenssituation sind, also dass deren Einbezug eine normative Bewertung eher erschweren oder gar verfälschen und (b) die These, dass arme Menschen besonders gut über das moralische Gewicht ihrer Lebenssituation Auskunft geben können, ja eine normative Bewertung ohne diese subjektive Perspektive gar nicht adäquat möglich ist. Die erste These (a) kann als Entfremdungsthese bezeichnet werden, die zweite (b) als Partizipationsthese und auch wenn beide zumeist nicht in reiner Form auftreten, so markieren sie doch eine wichtige Differenz in einer normativen Bewertung der Armut ebenso wie in der Armutsforschung im Allgemeinen. In diesem Beitrag wird nun das Verhältnis beider im Rahmen einer spezifischen Konzeption von philosophischer Armutsforschung, die Armut als eine Verletzung von legitimen Gerechtigkeitsansprüchen versteht, herausgearbeitet. Die leitende These ist dabei, dass subjektive Erfahrungen ein notwendiger Bestandteil sowohl des Entdeckungs- als auch des Begründungszusammenhanges einer solchen Kritik der Armut sind, die jedoch durch intersubjektiv ausweisbare Kriterien gestützt werden müssen.

In this paper I explore the philosophical debate about poverty. Although there is a significant amount of philosophical research on poverty – especially on world wide and absolute poverty – there is little reflection on what philosophical poverty research could be as a distinct research agenda and also little reflection on certain questions regarding the concept and normative evaluation of poverty. Here, I explore two important questions: What is poverty, which relates to conceptual issues and the definition of poverty. How can poverty be evaluated, which brings forward the normative substance of poverty and its special relation to morality and ethics. In the last section I conclude with further remarks on such a philosophy of poverty.

Adolescence is a valuable phase of life, not just because it is the phase of learning in school and preparing for a working life. During the COVID-19 pandemic it became clear that the rights, experiences, and lifeworlds of adolescents are considered less important than the needs of school, work, and productivity. However, there is an ethical claim for people to have a good adolescence, and this means that the losses of social contact, experiences, time, and space demanded of adolescents, in order to protect older and vulnerable groups during the COVID-19 pandemic, should be taken seriously. A distinctive quality of adolescence is that it cannot be repeated, nor can these experiences be replicated as adults. First experiences of independence, friendship, love, informality, recklessness, and youthful exuberance are intrinsically valuable and cannot be substituted for later in life. It is therefore not surprising that adolescents have sought and found their own spaces during the pandemic, some of them forbidden, because lock downs and closed social spaces have relegated them to the confines of their childhood bedrooms. In this paper, I explore an ethic of a good adolescence, which was impacted on by the COVID-19 pandemic, and consider what can be learned from this situation. Adolescents are to be taken seriously, their experiences are no less valuable than those of adults, and the losses they have suffered for the benefit of others should be honored. As far as possible, young people should be supported to have a voice in public discourse and in finding spaces to be adolescents.

In this paper I am interested in the question of whether and why states should prioritize child refugees over adult refugees in cases where they are not able to grant refuge to all those who are entitled to it. In particular I discuss three grounds on which such a prioritization could be based: (a) vulnerability, (b) efficiency and (c) life phase and life span. As can be shown, these grounds also apply, to some extent, to particular groups of adults such as women, the elderly, or people with special needs. Based on this I conclude that states should invest significant resources into filtering out those who are the most needy and vulnerable although there are several limitations to doing that. Only if such a selection process were impossible, or so costly and time-consuming that it would result in significantly fewer refugees being admitted, would states have good moral reasons to prioritize children without further screening.

This volume presents philosophical contributions examining questions of the grounding and justification of taxation and different types of taxes such as inheritance, wealth, consumption or income tax in relation to justice and the concept of a just society. The chapters cover the different levels at which the discussion on taxation and justice takes place: On the principal level, chapters investigate the justification and grounding of taxation as such and the role taxation plays and should play in the design of justice, be it for a just society or a just world order. On a more concrete level, chapters present discussions of these general reflections in more depth and examine different types of taxation, tax systems and their design and implementation. On an applied level, chapters discuss certain specific taxes, such as wealth and inheritance taxes, and examine whether or not a certain tax should be favored and for what reasons as well as why it is just to target certain kinds of assets or income. Finally, this volume contains chapters that discuss the central issue of international and global taxation and their relation to global justice.

Digitalisierung ist eine Schlüsseltechnologie im 21. Jahrhundert und prägt heute das private Leben und den Alltag durch Internet, Laptop, Smartphone, KI oder Soziale Medien. Das gilt insbesondere auch für zwischenmenschliche Beziehungen - zum Beispiel in Familie, Beruf, Freundschaft, Liebe, Therapie. Solche Beziehungen sind für Menschen von großer Bedeutung, sie sind wichtig für die psychische und physische Gesundheit, für Erfahrungen der Anerkennung und für ein gutes Leben - dahinter steht die anthropologische These des Menschen als animal sociale. Die Veränderung von Beziehungen - und zwar nicht nur ihrer Form, sondern auch ihres Inhalts und ihrer Wertigkeit - durch die Digitalisierung bedarf daher der eingehenden ethischen und interdisziplinären Reflexion. In diesem Band werden ausgewählte Beziehungsformen unter den Bedingungen der Digitalisierung aus unterschiedlichen disziplinären Perspektiven reflektiert, um Chancen, Potentiale, aber auch Risiken und Herausforderungen sichtbar zu machen.

Axel Honneth has highlighted the importance and role of mutual recognition for the development and sustainability of personal identity. His theory to reconstruct society as the institutionalization of different forms and modes of recognition has been widely discussed but one specific aspect has been left out so far: the temporal and institutional dimension of social esteem. In this paper I argue that social esteem is not simply earned for societal valuable features and achievements but rather gained within the framework of a certain life course. The social sciences discuss this as the institutionalization of life courses which is accompanied with certain social security systems to match the demands of the fordistic organization of labour. Social esteem is not randomly tied to work and labour but rather through a set of institutions as education, employment, social security and pension systems, that on the one hand sanction deviance and on the other hand provide security to pursue a good life. The institutionalized life course allows the individual to plan its future and provides her with a reference point for its legitimate claims. Overall, this provides further insights into the meaning of social esteem and its institutionalization in a modern working society without which the critical function and aim of social philosophy can not be fulfilled. For a social theory of recognition it is necessary to fill its words and concepts with the life the social sciences describe.Die Bedeutung wechselseitiger Anerkennung für die Ausbildung von Identität und für das Verständnis gesellschaftlicher Formationen wurde seit der Reaktualisierung des Anerkennungsbegriffes durch Axel Honneth vielfach aufgenommen und diskutiert. Ein Aspekt, der hierbei bislang zu wenig systematisch untersucht wurde, ist die zeitliche Dimension sozialer Anerkennungsverhältnisse. Die hier vertretene These lautet, dass soziale Wertschätzung im wesentlichen nicht einfach aktual an eine gesellschaftlich für sinnvoll und nützlich erachtete Leistung oder Eigenschaft gekoppelt ist, sondern vielmehr eine in sich zeitliche Kategorie ist, die also im Rahmen eines Lebenslaufes kontinuierlich erworben wird. In anderen Worten: Will man soziale Wertschätzung als Strukturprinzip moderner esellschaften erfassen, so bedarf es keiner synchronen sondern vielmehr einer asynchronen Perspektive, die soziale Anerkennungsverhältnisse über die Zeit abbildet. Dies kann am Konzept des institutionalisierten Lebenslaufes und der mit ihm verbundenen Rahmenbedingungen gezeigt werden. Individuelle Leistung wird nicht einfach gegen gesellschaftlichen und sozio-ökonomischen Status getauscht, sondern vielmehr ist dieser an einen nachvollziehbaren Lebenslauf gebunden. Solcherart langfristige Orientierung wurde und wird durch ein System der betrieblichen wie auch staatlichen Garantie, dass erbrachte Leistungen konserviert und belohnt werden, überhaupt ermöglicht und gestützt. Soziale Wertschätzung ist somit nicht nur abhängig von der Eingliederung in eine bestimmte Gesellschaftsformation, die Leistungen und Eigenschaften honoriert, sondern von der Dauerhaftigkeit dieser “Mitgliedschaft”. Ihren differenzierenden Charakter übt soziale Wertschätzung also wesentlich auch darüber aus, dass Diskontinuitäten im Lebenslauf sanktioniert werden.Axel Honneth naglasio je važnost i ulogu međusobnog priznanja za razvoj i održivost osobnog identiteta. O njegovoj teoriji društvene rekonstrukcije kao institucionalizacije različitih oblika i modusa priznanja naširoko se raspravljalo, no jedan specifičan vid dosad je bio izostavljen: vremenska i institucionalna dimenzija društvenog poštovanja. U ovom članku tvrdim da nije tako da se društveno poštovanje jednostavno zaslužuje zbog društveno vrijednih značajki i postignuća, nego se ono zadobiva unutar okvira određenog tijeka života. Društvene znanosti o tome raspravljaju kao o institucionalizaciji životnih tijekova koja je popraćena određenim sustavima socijalne sigurnosti kako bi se zadovoljili zahtjevi fordističke organizacije rada. Društveno poštovanje nije uz rad vezano nasumce, nego putem skupa institucija kao što su obrazovanje, zaposlenje, socijalna sigurnost i mirovinski sustavi, koji, s jedne strane, sankcioniraju zastranjenja i, s druge, omogućuju sigurnost u slijeđenju dobrog života. Institucionalizirani tijek života omogućuje pojedincu da planira svoju budućnost te mu pruža referentnu točku za svoje legitimne zahtjeve. Sve u svemu, to omogućuje daljnje uvide u značenje društvenog poštovanja i njegove institucionalizacije u modernom društvu bez kojih se kritička funkcija i cilj socijalne filozofije ne mogu ispuniti. Za društvenu teoriju priznanja nužno je da svoje riječi i pojmove ispuni životom što ga opisuju društvene znanosti