Cambridge Journal of Economics Advance Access originally published online on September 8, 2008
Cambridge Journal of Economics 2009 33(6):1135-1152; doi:10.1093/cje/ben027
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Social analysis and the capabilities approach: a limit to Martha Nussbaum's universalist ethics
* University of Nevada, Las Vegas
Address for correspondence: Women's Studies, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, 4505 Maryland Pkwy; Box 455055, Las Vegas, NV 89154-5055, USA; email: s.charusheela{at}gmail.com
Postcolonial theorists critique modernist universalisms for legitimating structural power. Responding to these critiques, Martha Nussbaum argues that abandoning universalism leads to ethical relativism. Adapting Amartya Sen's capabilities approach, she has proposed a modified universalism that draws on cross-cultural conversations as a non-ethnocentric basis for universal judgment and intervention. This paper takes as its point of departure Nussbaum's (mis)reading of a critique by Nkiru Nzegwu. Working from that conversational failure, the paper identifies the social analysis Nussbaum deploys as a point of ethnocentric breakdown in her universalist approach.
Key Words: Martha Nussbaum Capabilities Universalism Relativism Postcolonial thought
JEL classifications: A13, B54, I00, O20
Manuscript received July 10, 2006; final version received January 8, 2008.
![]()
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
S. A. Kayatekin Between political economy and postcolonial theory: first encounters Camb. J. Econ., November 1, 2009; 33(6): 1113 - 1118. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
