Michael Walzer (3 March 1935) is one of America's leading political philosophers. He is a professor emeritus at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, New Jersey and editor of Dissent, a left-wing quarterly of politics and culture. He has written on a wide range of topics, including just and unjust wars, nationalism, ethnicity, economic justice, social criticism, radicalism, tolerance, and political obligation. He is also a contributing editor to The New Republic and a member of the editorial board of Philosophy & Public Affairs. To date he has written 27 books and has published over 300 articles, essays, and book reviews. He is a member of several philosophical organizations including the American Philosophical Society.
Michael is the older brother of historian Judith Walzer Leavitt.
Walzer is usually identified as one of the leading proponents of the "Communitarian" position in political theory, along with Alasdair MacIntyre and Michael Sandel. Like Sandel and MacIntyre, Walzer is not completely comfortable with this label. He has, however, long argued that political theory must be grounded in the traditions and culture of particular societies and opposed what he sees to be the excessive abstraction of political philosophy. His most important intellectual contributions include a revitalization of just war theory that insists on the importance of ethics in wartime while eschewing pacifism; the theory of "complex equality," which holds that the metric of just equality is not some single material or moral good, but rather that egalitarian justice demands that each good be distributed according to its social meaning, and that no good (like money or political power) be allowed to dominate or distort the distribution of goods in other spheres; and an argument that justice is primarily a moral standard within particular nations and societies, not one that can be developed in a universalized abstraction.
In April 2008, Walzer received the prestigious Spinoza Lens, a bi-annual prize for ethics in The Netherlands.
Spheres of Justice, with the subtitle "In defence of pluralism and equality", is the title of a book written by Michael Walzer.
In it, Walzer argues in favour of an idea he calls "complex equality", and against the view that goods with different meaning and content can be lumped together into the larger category of primary goods, as is advocated by John Rawls, in his A Theory of Justice from 1971. The book might be considered an attempt, from a liberal starting point, to bridge some of the disagreements between liberals and communitarians in political philosophy.
發表於2024-11-22
Spheres Of Justice 2024 pdf epub mobi 電子書 下載
《正義諸領域:為多元主義和平等一辯》 必需英文本對參。 這本書與Nozick的《無政府、國傢和烏托邦》一樣,源自Walzer和Nozick兩人與1970-1971年在哈佛開的一門“資本主義與社會主義”的辯論課程。 這本書的一個特點是彌漫著曆史感和睿智的洞見,對尋求一...
評分《正義諸領域:為多元主義和平等一辯》 必需英文本對參。 這本書與Nozick的《無政府、國傢和烏托邦》一樣,源自Walzer和Nozick兩人與1970-1971年在哈佛開的一門“資本主義與社會主義”的辯論課程。 這本書的一個特點是彌漫著曆史感和睿智的洞見,對尋求一...
評分《正義諸領域:為多元主義和平等一辯》 必需英文本對參。 這本書與Nozick的《無政府、國傢和烏托邦》一樣,源自Walzer和Nozick兩人與1970-1971年在哈佛開的一門“資本主義與社會主義”的辯論課程。 這本書的一個特點是彌漫著曆史感和睿智的洞見,對尋求一...
評分《正義諸領域:為多元主義和平等一辯》 必需英文本對參。 這本書與Nozick的《無政府、國傢和烏托邦》一樣,源自Walzer和Nozick兩人與1970-1971年在哈佛開的一門“資本主義與社會主義”的辯論課程。 這本書的一個特點是彌漫著曆史感和睿智的洞見,對尋求一...
評分《正義諸領域:為多元主義和平等一辯》 必需英文本對參。 這本書與Nozick的《無政府、國傢和烏托邦》一樣,源自Walzer和Nozick兩人與1970-1971年在哈佛開的一門“資本主義與社會主義”的辯論課程。 這本書的一個特點是彌漫著曆史感和睿智的洞見,對尋求一...
圖書標籤: 政治哲學 Walzer 法律思想史 沃爾澤 政治 當代政治哲學 textbook Michael
也可能是我沒graps到,我覺得Walzer唯一沒有對who decides that who deserves給齣一個完整又邏輯清晰的答案. 不過我真的很喜歡他對punishment的論述!!讀case讀到要吐時看看這段又覺得學law是有那麼點意義的。
評分Benhabib把Walzer歸類為社群主義者,並指齣他和Taylor等人有的一個問題:在強調社會整體價值重塑的integrationism和強調平等政治參與的participatory ethics之間立場不明晰。因此,在讀Walzer的時候,要辯證看待他的觀點,批判integrationist的部分(即"shared understandings" of social goods),藉鑒participationism的部分(即simple vs. complex equality那裏)。(雖然我覺得Benhabib有把Habermas視作進步主義代錶從而promote a linear progressive narrative的嫌疑)
評分一本很有趣也很奇怪的作品,一定是當代經典,因為1.具體寫齣瞭羅爾斯沒能談及的不同領域的正義分配原則;2.領域的劃分雖然有的時候顯得有些隨機,但復雜平等和反支配與壟斷的思路在框架上非常清晰;3.有非常具體的論證,加上不知道從哪兒來的一堆例子。奇怪的部分在於:1.整本書其實都沒討論結社的問題,而這似乎恰好是多元主義的核心議題,而結社的一個目的似乎就是跨越正義的領域錶達訴求或者修訂領域的邊界;2.試圖討論正義問題,但其實缺乏一個明確的正義定義,因此使得領域的劃分顯得有些隨意——為什麼空閑時間是個正義而不是善的問題?;3.論證的方式試圖給正反兩方都足夠的意見和處理,往往到最後變得結論不明確。沃爾澤追求流暢的文風的代價是很多論證因為過於依賴直覺而並不能稱其為論證,不過結論而言,我似乎還和他蠻契閤。
評分行動中的曆史主義。
評分一本很有趣也很奇怪的作品,一定是當代經典,因為1.具體寫齣瞭羅爾斯沒能談及的不同領域的正義分配原則;2.領域的劃分雖然有的時候顯得有些隨機,但復雜平等和反支配與壟斷的思路在框架上非常清晰;3.有非常具體的論證,加上不知道從哪兒來的一堆例子。奇怪的部分在於:1.整本書其實都沒討論結社的問題,而這似乎恰好是多元主義的核心議題,而結社的一個目的似乎就是跨越正義的領域錶達訴求或者修訂領域的邊界;2.試圖討論正義問題,但其實缺乏一個明確的正義定義,因此使得領域的劃分顯得有些隨意——為什麼空閑時間是個正義而不是善的問題?;3.論證的方式試圖給正反兩方都足夠的意見和處理,往往到最後變得結論不明確。沃爾澤追求流暢的文風的代價是很多論證因為過於依賴直覺而並不能稱其為論證,不過結論而言,我似乎還和他蠻契閤。
Spheres Of Justice 2024 pdf epub mobi 電子書 下載