Social Choice And Justice

Andy Blunden’s Hegel Marx & Vygotsky, Essays in Social Philosophy uses a series of essays to demonstrate how the cultural psychology of Lev Vygotsky and the Soviet Activity Theorists can be used to renew Hegelian Marxism as an interdisciplinary science.

Originally published in 1970, this classic study has been recognized for its groundbreaking role in integrating economics and ethics, and for its influence in opening up new areas of research in social choice, including aggregative assessment. It has also had a large influence on international organizations, including the United Nations, notably in its work on human development. The book showed that the "impossibility theorems" in social choice theory--led by the pioneering work of Kenneth Arrow--do not negate the possibility of reasoned and democratic social choice. Sen's ideas about social choice, welfare economics, inequality, poverty, and human rights have continued to evolve since the book's first appearance. This expanded edition preserves the text of the original while presenting eleven new chapters of fresh arguments and results. "Expanding on the early work of Condorcet, Pareto, Arrow, and others, Sen provides rigorous mathematical argumentation on the merits of voting mechanisms...For those with graduate training, it will serve as a frequently consulted reference and a necessity on one's book shelf." --J. F. O'Connell, Choice

It is probably fair to say that there does not exist a unique and generally accepted not ion of justice. Even if one confines oneself to economic justice one can still get many answers to the question of how justice - henceforth we shall use the term "distributive justice" should be defined and characterized. This may be disappointing for the outside observer but one can also view this as achallenge, at least as long as one thinks that distributive justice is an issue economics should be concerned with. Many problems of distributive justice can be described as follows: There is a fixed collection of well-defined objects (usually commodi ties) which are quantitatively measurable and perfectly divisible. This collection is to be divided up among a certain number of individuals, the members of society, let 's say. According to which principles or rules should this distribution be carried out? Should people be rewarded according to their ability or according to their needs? Should the distribution be such that nobody envies the bundle of any other member of society? Should the collection of entities be distributed in a way that yields the greatest benefi.

The first self-contained analysis of the use of questionnaire data to test theories of distributive justice.

This second part of a two-volume set continues to describe economists' efforts to quantify the social decisions people necessarily make and the philosophies that those choices define. Contributors draw on lessons from philosophy, history, and other disciplines, but they ultimately use editor Kenneth Arrow's seminal work on social choice as a jumping-off point for discussing ways to incentivize, punish, and distribute goods. Develops many subjects from Volume 1 (2002) while introducing new themes in welfare economics and social choice theory Features four sections: Foundations, Developments of the Basic Arrovian Schemes, Fairness and Rights, and Voting and Manipulation Appeals to readers who seek introductions to writings on human well-being and collective decision-making Presents a spectrum of material, from initial insights and basic functions to important variations on basic schemes

Presents an analysis of what justice is, the transcendental theory of justice and its drawbacks, and a persuasive argument for a comparative perspective on justice that can guide us in the choice between alternatives.

Arrow takes up the basic question of whether collective choices can reflect individual preferences. The seminal 1950 paper that opens the volume shows that given reasonable conditions that social choices must satisfy to reflect individual preferences, it is impossible to make a choice among alternatives without violating some of the conditions.