06.09.2021 Views

Wellbeing, Freedom and Social Justice The Capability Approach Re-Examined, 2017a

Wellbeing, Freedom and Social Justice The Capability Approach Re-Examined, 2017a

Wellbeing, Freedom and Social Justice The Capability Approach Re-Examined, 2017a

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

2. Core Ideas <strong>and</strong> the Framework<br />

67<br />

capabilities or a mixture. It follows that a choice must be made, but that<br />

there are various options to choose from.<br />

<br />

Finally, each capability theory will embrace some meta-theoretical<br />

commitments. Yet often, these meta-theoretical commitments are<br />

shared commitments within one’s discipline or one’s school within<br />

that discipline, <strong>and</strong> as a graduate student one has become socialised<br />

in accepting these meta-theoretical commitments as given. As a<br />

consequence, it often happens that scholars are not even aware that<br />

there are such things as meta-theoretical commitments. For example,<br />

if one wants to conduct a measurement exercise (a choice made in the<br />

module B1) then one may be committed to the methodological principle<br />

of parsimony (to build a model with as few assumptions <strong>and</strong> as elegantly<br />

as possible) or, instead, to providing a measurement that is embedded<br />

into a rich narrative description aimed at a better underst<strong>and</strong>ing. Or,<br />

if one wants to construct a theory of justice (again, a choice made in<br />

the module B1), then one may aim for an ideal or non-ideal theory<br />

of justice, or for a partial or a comprehensive account of justice. Or<br />

one may espouse certain views about the status of theories of justice<br />

or meta-ethical claims related to, for example, the role that intuitions<br />

are permitted to play as a source of normativity. Some debates within<br />

the capability approach, but also between capability scholars <strong>and</strong><br />

those working in other paradigms, would be truly enlightened if we<br />

made the meta-theoretical commitments of our theories, accounts <strong>and</strong><br />

applications more explicit.<br />

<br />

In addition to the compulsory content of the core A-module, <strong>and</strong> the<br />

optional content of the non-optional B-modules, a capability theory<br />

could also add a third type of module, which I will call the contingent<br />

modules. <strong>The</strong>se are either modules that need to be taken on board due<br />

to some choices that have been made in a B-module, or else they are<br />

entirely optional, independent of what one has chosen in the B-modules.<br />

<strong>The</strong> following table gives an overview of the contingent modules.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!