Care and its constraints: Will care work pass through Pettit’s gate?

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Resumé

Welfare states are in a care crisis both in the sense of a practical care gap (abundant needs but not enough caregivers) and in the new movement to limit care to mere rehabilitation. Few political theorists pay attention to these developments, and those who do say little about the potential limits to care. This article discusses Philip Pettit’s theory of social justice in relation to questions of public care provisions. Pettit’s theory has been praised by feminists for its attention to social injustices and because it highlights fair limits to care. The article examines how Pettit builds up his argument involving the idea of a gateway good, heuristics and a set of constraints. Although the article points to the value of Pettit’s theory, Pettit’s arguments to limit the state’s care tasks depend on the false assumption that a theory of justice considers able-minded adults only. This article argues that Pettit’s assumption that we leave out children and not-so-able-minded elderly leads to a general neglect of the typical human life cycle, and in particular of those life stages that are most care-dependent. The constraints that he set up on the state’s care tasks build upon this problematic premise. If the premise is not accepted, the logic of Pettit’s heuristics and constraints, used to limit the state’s care tasks, loses its argumentative force. A realistic political theory that sets limits to the state’s care tasks should have something to say of all the stages of human life (including our care-dependent stages) and of the central structural relations that a normal life entails (such as having others depending on our care).

OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftPhilosophy & Social Criticism
Vol/bind44
Udgave nummer3
Sider (fra-til)278–301
Antal sider24
ISSN0191-4537
DOI
StatusUdgivet - 1 mar. 2018

Fingerprint

Pettit
heuristics
political theory
life cycle
welfare state
social justice
caregiver
rehabilitation
neglect
justice
Values
Human Life
Heuristics
Theory of Justice
Social Injustice
Rehabilitation
Theorists
Caregivers
Political Theory
Neglect

Emneord

    Citer dette

    @article{938eb51b55f746bd80cca3c71bcd1e1d,
    title = "Care and its constraints: Will care work pass through Pettit’s gate?",
    abstract = "Welfare states are in a care crisis both in the sense of a practical care gap (abundant needs but not enough caregivers) and in the new movement to limit care to mere rehabilitation. Few political theorists pay attention to these developments, and those who do say little about the potential limits to care. This article discusses Philip Pettit’s theory of social justice in relation to questions of public care provisions. Pettit’s theory has been praised by feminists for its attention to social injustices and because it highlights fair limits to care. The article examines how Pettit builds up his argument involving the idea of a gateway good, heuristics and a set of constraints. Although the article points to the value of Pettit’s theory, Pettit’s arguments to limit the state’s care tasks depend on the false assumption that a theory of justice considers able-minded adults only. This article argues that Pettit’s assumption that we leave out children and not-so-able-minded elderly leads to a general neglect of the typical human life cycle, and in particular of those life stages that are most care-dependent. The constraints that he set up on the state’s care tasks build upon this problematic premise. If the premise is not accepted, the logic of Pettit’s heuristics and constraints, used to limit the state’s care tasks, loses its argumentative force. A realistic political theory that sets limits to the state’s care tasks should have something to say of all the stages of human life (including our care-dependent stages) and of the central structural relations that a normal life entails (such as having others depending on our care).",
    keywords = "Philip Pettit, care, feminism, non-domination, recognition",
    author = "J{\o}rgensen, {Simon Laumann}",
    year = "2018",
    month = "3",
    day = "1",
    doi = "10.1177/0191453717701989",
    language = "English",
    volume = "44",
    pages = "278–301",
    journal = "Philosophy & Social Criticism",
    issn = "0191-4537",
    publisher = "SAGE Publications",
    number = "3",

    }

    Care and its constraints : Will care work pass through Pettit’s gate? / Jørgensen, Simon Laumann.

    I: Philosophy & Social Criticism, Bind 44, Nr. 3, 01.03.2018, s. 278–301.

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Care and its constraints

    T2 - Will care work pass through Pettit’s gate?

    AU - Jørgensen, Simon Laumann

    PY - 2018/3/1

    Y1 - 2018/3/1

    N2 - Welfare states are in a care crisis both in the sense of a practical care gap (abundant needs but not enough caregivers) and in the new movement to limit care to mere rehabilitation. Few political theorists pay attention to these developments, and those who do say little about the potential limits to care. This article discusses Philip Pettit’s theory of social justice in relation to questions of public care provisions. Pettit’s theory has been praised by feminists for its attention to social injustices and because it highlights fair limits to care. The article examines how Pettit builds up his argument involving the idea of a gateway good, heuristics and a set of constraints. Although the article points to the value of Pettit’s theory, Pettit’s arguments to limit the state’s care tasks depend on the false assumption that a theory of justice considers able-minded adults only. This article argues that Pettit’s assumption that we leave out children and not-so-able-minded elderly leads to a general neglect of the typical human life cycle, and in particular of those life stages that are most care-dependent. The constraints that he set up on the state’s care tasks build upon this problematic premise. If the premise is not accepted, the logic of Pettit’s heuristics and constraints, used to limit the state’s care tasks, loses its argumentative force. A realistic political theory that sets limits to the state’s care tasks should have something to say of all the stages of human life (including our care-dependent stages) and of the central structural relations that a normal life entails (such as having others depending on our care).

    AB - Welfare states are in a care crisis both in the sense of a practical care gap (abundant needs but not enough caregivers) and in the new movement to limit care to mere rehabilitation. Few political theorists pay attention to these developments, and those who do say little about the potential limits to care. This article discusses Philip Pettit’s theory of social justice in relation to questions of public care provisions. Pettit’s theory has been praised by feminists for its attention to social injustices and because it highlights fair limits to care. The article examines how Pettit builds up his argument involving the idea of a gateway good, heuristics and a set of constraints. Although the article points to the value of Pettit’s theory, Pettit’s arguments to limit the state’s care tasks depend on the false assumption that a theory of justice considers able-minded adults only. This article argues that Pettit’s assumption that we leave out children and not-so-able-minded elderly leads to a general neglect of the typical human life cycle, and in particular of those life stages that are most care-dependent. The constraints that he set up on the state’s care tasks build upon this problematic premise. If the premise is not accepted, the logic of Pettit’s heuristics and constraints, used to limit the state’s care tasks, loses its argumentative force. A realistic political theory that sets limits to the state’s care tasks should have something to say of all the stages of human life (including our care-dependent stages) and of the central structural relations that a normal life entails (such as having others depending on our care).

    KW - Philip Pettit

    KW - care

    KW - feminism

    KW - non-domination

    KW - recognition

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85042846981&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1177/0191453717701989

    DO - 10.1177/0191453717701989

    M3 - Journal article

    VL - 44

    SP - 278

    EP - 301

    JO - Philosophy & Social Criticism

    JF - Philosophy & Social Criticism

    SN - 0191-4537

    IS - 3

    ER -