Amartya Sen
Freedom, in the eyes of Amartya Sen, the famous Indian economist and philosopher, does not consist merely of being left to our own devices. It also requires that people have the necessary resources to lead lives that they themselves consider to be good ones. The focus on the individual has led some critics to accuse Sen of “methodological individualism” — not a compliment. Communitarian opponents, in particular, think that he pays insufficient regard to the broader social group. In response, he — usually an unfailingly courteous writer — becomes a bit cross, pointing out that “people who think, choose and act” are simply “a manifest reality in the world”. Of course communities influence people, “but ultimately it is individual valuation on which we have to draw, while recognising the profound interdependence of the aluations of people who interact with each other”.
Nor is Sen easily caricatured as an egalitarian: “capabilities”, for example, do not have to be entirely equal. He is a pluralist, and recognises that even capabilities cannot always trump other values. Liberty has priority, Sen insists, but not in an absurdly purist fashion that would dictate “treating the slightest gain of liberty — no matter how small — as enough reason to make huge sacrifices in other amenities of a good life — no matter how large”.
Throughout, Sen remains true to his Indian roots. One of the joys of his recently published book entitled The Idea of Justice is the rich use of Indian classical thought — the debate between 3rd-century emperor Ashoka, a liberal optimist, and Kautilya, a downbeat institutionalist, is much more enlightening than, say, a tired contrast between Hobbes and Hume.
Despite these diverting stories, the volume cannot be said to fall into the category of a “beach read”: subtitles such as “The Plurality of Non-Rejectability” provide plenty of warning. But for those who like their summer dinner tables to be filled with intelligent, dissenting discourse, the book is worth the weight. There is plenty here to argue with. Sen wouldn’t have it any other way.
Nor is Sen easily caricatured as an egalitarian: “capabilities”, for example, do not have to be entirely equal. He is a pluralist, and recognises that even capabilities cannot always trump other values. Liberty has priority, Sen insists, but not in an absurdly purist fashion that would dictate “treating the slightest gain of liberty — no matter how small — as enough reason to make huge sacrifices in other amenities of a good life — no matter how large”.
Throughout, Sen remains true to his Indian roots. One of the joys of his recently published book entitled The Idea of Justice is the rich use of Indian classical thought — the debate between 3rd-century emperor Ashoka, a liberal optimist, and Kautilya, a downbeat institutionalist, is much more enlightening than, say, a tired contrast between Hobbes and Hume.
Despite these diverting stories, the volume cannot be said to fall into the category of a “beach read”: subtitles such as “The Plurality of Non-Rejectability” provide plenty of warning. But for those who like their summer dinner tables to be filled with intelligent, dissenting discourse, the book is worth the weight. There is plenty here to argue with. Sen wouldn’t have it any other way.
Internet: <http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk> (adapted).
According to the text, judge — right (C) or wrong (E) — the item below.
Communitarian opponents make up the largest and most vocal group of Sen’s critics.
Communitarian opponents make up the largest and most vocal group of Sen’s critics.
