#reiman

[academiat]

إن علم الرياضيات يعتبر من العلوم الأساسية في فهم الكون، ولكن توجد فيه بعض المسائل الرياضية المعقدة لدرجة حيرت العلماء لعقود. في هذه المقالة سنتطرق إلى إحدى المسائل المعقدة والتي من الصعب إيجاد اجابة بسيطة لها ألا وهي فرضية ريمان.

التفاصيل من هنا

[ginteme]

Sen argues that we should focus ‘‘on the advancement or retreat of justice’’ rather than on its ideal form. He contends that social contractarians’ pursuit of ideal justice has two flaws.First of all, this pursuit presumes that a unique agreement on the ideal of justice can be achieved, which Sen contends is unlikely. Second, the pursuit assumes that we need an ideal of justice to judge improvements in justice, which Sen contends is false.About the first claim, Sen thinks that while a unique agreement on the ideal of justice is unlikely, there are ‘‘reasoned agreements that can be reached on how injustice can be reduced despite our different views on ‘ideal’ regimes.’’ No doubt this is true. We are far from a unique agreement on the ideal of justice, and there are judgments about reducing injustice to which many will subscribe. But Sen does not consider that a reasoned defense of a conception of the ideal of justice might play a role in reducing disagreement. More importantly, Sen’s argument that we do not need the ideal of justice fails because he misses a crucial point of the attempt to determine the ideal of justice, which is important for his own project. To argue that we do not need knowledge of the ideal of justice for the purpose of improving justice or reducing injustice, Sen points out that we can determine the relative height of Mounts Kilimanjaro and McKinley without having to compare them to Mount Everest. ‘‘There would be something deeply odd,’’ Sen writes, ‘‘in a general belief that a comparison of any two alternatives cannot be sensibly made without prior identification of a supreme alternative.’’ That Sen is missing the point here can be seen by asking whether we could compare the relative heights of Mounts Kilimanjaro and McKinley without knowing what height is. Surely, we cannot. Likewise, we cannot compare the relative justice of two social arrangements without knowing what justice is. What Sen is failing to grasp is that--whatever else it is--the attempt to specify ideal justice is an attempt to tell us what justice is, not simply to identify one set of institutions as perfect. In this regard, the absence-- in Sen’s more than 400 pages about the idea of justice--of any attempt whatsoever to identify what justice is, is no surprise. But this is a costly omission. When Sen tells us that we can compare the relative justice of different social arrangements, or that we can agree to eliminate the most egregious forms of injustice, his claims never do--and, in principle, never can-- get beyond popular opinions about justice and injustice. Sen has cut himself off from precisely the contribution that philosophers can make to improving justice.

No Idea of Justice: A Social Contractarian Response to Sen and Nussbaum

Jeffrey Reiman

DAMN normally i never post quotes from what i'm reading but my professor just OWNed Sen

also pls excuse shitty formatting i am not good at internetting

[enterprise-e]