The matter with subjects of justice

Although the non-human turn in justice theory remains in its infancy, several projects have emerged, including Earth system justice, multispecies justice, and planetary justice. Crucially, candidate theories must provide convincing responses to the who, what, and how of justice. The question of who...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inEnvironmental politics Vol. 34; no. 1; pp. 188 - 191
Main Author Gellers, Joshua C.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Abingdon Routledge 02.01.2025
Taylor & Francis Ltd
Subjects
Anthropocene
Candidates
Debates
Infancy
Justice
matter
Multispecies justice
non-human
Philosophers
planetary justice
Property
Theory
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:Although the non-human turn in justice theory remains in its infancy, several projects have emerged, including Earth system justice, multispecies justice, and planetary justice. Crucially, candidate theories must provide convincing responses to the who, what, and how of justice. The question of who can prove particularly challenging, as philosophers continue to debate the moral relevance of properties of entities or the relations between them. Scholars of environmental politics seeking to develop more-than-human justice theories must carefully attend to issues inherent in this debate, including conceptual inconsistencies. Recent work by Winter and Schlosberg advancing a materialist perspective on multispecies and planetary justice demonstrates the difficult task of participating in this conversation, as evidenced by their application of the term 'subjects of justice.' In this brief essay, I identify three flaws in their use of this phrase and explain why the treatment of subjects matters to justice theory in the Anthropocene.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
content type line 14
ISSN:0964-4016
1743-8934
DOI:10.1080/09644016.2024.2334611