Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
J. Riley (2008)
Mill’s extraordinary utilitarian moral theoryPolitics, Philosophy & Economics, 9
A. Sen (2006)
What Do We Want from a Theory of JusticeThe Journal of Philosophy, 103
M. Adler, M. Fleurbaey (2016)
The Oxford Handbook of Well-Being and Public Policy
Journal of Philosophy, 82
W. Mander (2011)
British Idealism: A History
A. Sen (2004)
Elements of a Theory of Human RightsPhilosophy & Public Affairs, 32
Amartya Sen (1999)
Development as Freedom
C. Jung (2014)
THE COLLECTED WORKS OF
A. Sen (2000)
Consequential evaluation and practical reasonThe Journal of Philosophy, 97
D. Weinstein (2007)
Utilitarianism and the New Liberalism
S. Olsaretti (2005)
ENDORSEMENT AND FREEDOM IN AMARTYA SEN'S CAPABILITY APPROACHEconomics and Philosophy, 21
A. Sen (1987)
Commodities and Capabilities
M. Qizilbash (2006)
Capability, Happiness and Adaptation in Sen and J. S. MillUtilitas, 18
A. Sen (2006)
Reason, Freedom and Well-beingUtilitas, 18
PurposeSen has recently acknowledged his “immense” debts to the liberal tradition of J.S. Mill and, to much lesser extent, to T.H. Green. This essay explores how identifying himself so enthusiastically with Mill sheds light on one’s understanding of Sen’s defense of the capabilities approach. But trying to understand him through the lens of Mill can be a double-edged sword. Sen not only risks causing his readers to append too much Mill to capabilities liberalism, but he also risks encouraging them to misinterpret Mill. These implications naturally bear significantly on how compelling readers find both Sen’s conception of distributive justice and the public policy recommendations based on it. Besides exploring some of the problematic implications of Sen’s readily identifying with Mill’s liberalism in particular, this essay also speculates on what it means to identify with any political philosophical tradition and how such identification colors and adds momentum to both one’s political theorizing and practical recommendations. The paper aims to discuss these issues.Design/methodology/approachTextual interpretation.FindingsAs noted above, this paper examines how Sen’s esteem for J.S. Mill sheds light on the capabilities approach. It also suggests that using Mill to understand Sen better is fraught with difficulties.Research limitations/implicationsThe paper also speculates on what it means to identify with a particular political philosophical tradition much as Sen identifies with Mill’s liberalism.Practical implicationsThis paper also explores how such identification with a particular political philosophical tradition colors and adds momentum to both one’s political theorizing and practical recommendations.Originality/valueUsing Mill to understand Sen better is certainly worthwhile. On the other hand, doing this sort of thing risks distorting Mill and even Sen.
International Journal of Social Economics – Emerald Publishing
Published: Dec 5, 2016
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.