Talk:Social Justice in the Liberal State

Philosophy: Literature / Social and political Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophical literature
	Social and political philosophy

Books

	Books portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles
	This article has been marked as needing an infobox.

I'm a big fan of Bruce Ackerman. Can someone explain the difference between the paper "The Liberal State" and his book Social Justice in the Liberal State? If they're the same, then I will certainly contribute to this page!

The proper title of the book is Social Justice in the Liberal State and I recommend the title of the article be changed to reflect this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by VentrueCapital (talk • contribs)

done. Ste4k 05:19, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think this was done wrong. The article should be Social Justice in the Liberal State, but that's just a redirect to this page, which has the incorrectly formatted title of Social justice in the liberal state —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.29.141.11 (talk • contribs)

I fixed it. Article now exists at Social Justice in the Liberal State --MichaelZimmer (talk) 20:29, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just to be clear, the article names for books are an exemption to the otherwise standard rule of not capitalizing second and subsequent words . See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (books)#Capitalization, and for example, Spheres of Justice or A Theory of Justice. --MichaelZimmer (talk) 23:30, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Summary

Moving all of this to Discussion, previous OR regarding the book:

The book addresses the topic of social justice given scarcity in society. In this paper Ackerman gives an argument on how several principles, rationality, consistency, neutrality, and undominated equality can result in a conversational method that can determine the legitimacy of the use of power by an individual over a given resource.

Ackerman starts his argument with the idea that there are a scarce amount of resources in society, and people will conflict over these scarce resources. The conflict arises over resources since a person must control their person and their immediate environment (to get food, etc.) to sustain life.

It is inevitable in a world of scarce resources in which a person will claim control over resources that another person has. The question is, how would such a conflict be resolved with a conscientious attempt at a reasonable answer?

One possible answer is to use power to attack the claimant. As well, the less power the person has, the more they stand to lose from argument; the more power the person has the more easily they can suppress the claimant. Ackerman assumes that instead of violence, the person will respond with an argument, with particular features to be discussed, as to why they should control the resources in question.

Ackerman hopes to build a blueprint of an argument method that can successfully be used to settle claims over resources. The assumption mentioned in the last section is that the parties will not use violence to suppress the speech of the other party. Ackerman's blueprint has four principles that, when used together, can lead to a successful discussion method to resolve resource conflicts.

...Ste4k 06:48, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Other Sources

The New Republic - Social Justice in the Liberal State. (10/25/1980) By: Walzer, Michael - Reviews the book "Social Justice in the Liberal State," by Bruce A. Ackerman. Ste4k 06:53, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Sjitls.jpg

Image:Sjitls.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:47, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Social Justice in the Liberal State. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:22, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality

The article may be overly in favor of the book instead of taking a NPOV. e.g. "the breadth of the attack on the fundamental issues of man and society is impressive.", ""Ackerman has mounted a profound challenge to contract thinking"

Ianstagram (talk) 08:57, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]