scholarly journals Why the Social Connection Model Fails: Participation is Neither Necessary nor Sufficient for Political Responsibility

Hypatia ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 567-586
Author(s):  
Mattias Gunnemyr
Keyword(s):  
Social Connection ◽  
Political Responsibility ◽  
Structural Process ◽  
The Social ◽  
Iris Marion Young ◽  
Forward Looking

AbstractIris Marion Young presents a social connection model on which those, and only those, who participate in structural processes that produce injustice have a forward-looking responsibility to redress the resulting injustice by challenging the structures that produce it (she sometimes calls this a political responsibility [Young 2011]). In Young's view, this is an all-things-considered, albeit discretionary, responsibility. I argue that participation in a structural process that produces injustice is neither necessary nor sufficient for having political responsibilities, and that therefore the social connection model must be rejected. A subtler model is needed, one that depicts participation in a structural process that produces injustice as sufficient (but not necessary) for having pro tanto forward-looking responsibilities to redress the process, unless the participating agent satisfies certain excusing conditions. I suggest the intuitive force of the thought that mere participation gives us political responsibilities can be explained by more fundamental considerations. Hastily, we might conclude that all participants have political responsibilities simply because most of them satisfy at least one of the following conditions: they cause injustice to continue, they are morally responsible for injustice, they benefit from injustice, they have communal ties with the victims of injustice, or they have the capacity to redress injustice.

Confronting Political Responsibility: The Problem of Acknowledgment

Hypatia ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 99-117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacob Schiff
Keyword(s):  
Social Connection ◽  
Political Responsibility ◽  
Bad Faith ◽  
Structural Injustice ◽  
Iris Marion Young

Iris Marion Young articulated a social connection model of responsibility to conceptualize political responsibility for structural injustice. Schiff argues that actually confronting our responsibility is problematic: the pervasiveness of structural injustice makes it difficult to acknowledge as a problem, while distances between sufferers and contributors complicate our acknowledgment of social connection. These problems are exacerbated by thoughtlessness, bad faith, and misrecognition. Narrative can facilitate the acknowledgment necessary for us to confront our political responsibility.

scholarly journals Who should fight domination? Individual responsibility and structural injustice

2021 ◽  
pp. 1470594X2110033
Author(s):  
Dorothea Gädeke
Keyword(s):  
Moral Responsibility ◽  
Individual Responsibility ◽  
Power Dynamics ◽  
Social Connection ◽  
Political Responsibility ◽  
Structural Dimension ◽  
Structural Injustice ◽  
The Social ◽  
In Virtue Of

Who is responsible for fighting domination? Answering this question, I argue, requires taking the structural dimension of domination seriously to avoid unwillingly reproducing domination in the name of justice. Having cast domination as a structural injustice that refers to structurally constituted positions of power and disempowerment, I show that the outcome-based, the capacity-based and the social connection model suggested in literature on responsibility, fail to fully meet this challenge. Drawing on insights from all of them, I propose an account that proves more sensitive towards the power dynamics at play in fighting domination. It is based on a fundamental duty of justice, which gives rise to two kinds of responsibility. Dominators, dominated and peripheral agents share political responsibility for domination in virtue of reproducing domination by occupying a position within structures of dominating power; they are required to acknowledge and undermine their position of power or disempowerment rather than simply using and thus tacitly reaffirming it. Political responsibility for domination is distinct from moral responsibility for acting within contexts of domination; in fact, ignoring this difference risks reproducing rather than transforming relations of domination. Bystanders who are not implicated in reproducing domination bear limited remedial responsibility to support this struggle.

Blameless Participation in Structural Injustice

2019 ◽  
Vol 45 (2) ◽  
pp. 149-177
Author(s):  
David Atenasio ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Social Connection ◽  
Structural Injustice ◽  
Social Coordination ◽  
Iris Marion Young ◽  
Forward Looking

According to Iris Marion Young, a structural injustice occurs when members participating in one or more scheme(s) of social coordination act blamelessly, but the schemes, in combination with norms and background conditions, systematically prevent some from developing their capacities and fulfilling their rights. Because participants are mostly blameless, Young argues that traditional individualist theories of responsibility inadequately address structural injustices. Young instead proposes a social connection theory of responsibility, whereby participants in a structural injustice acquire forward-looking responsibilities to remediate the injustice by organizing, voting, protesting and pressuring institutions. In this paper, I argue that Young’s theory of structural injustice conflates several different moral failings, and that when we correctly disambiguate structural injustices, we can successfully address them with traditional individualist theories of responsibility, both forward-looking and backward-looking.

Online vrienden bepalen de overtuigingskracht van SNS-campagnes

2011 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Guda van Noort ◽  
Marjolijn Antheunis ◽  
Eva van Reijmersdal
Keyword(s):  
Social Network ◽  
Social Context ◽  
Crucial Role ◽  
Social Network Sites ◽  
Social Connections ◽  
Social Connection ◽  
Marketing Communication ◽  
The Social

Online Friends Determine the Persuasiveness of SNS Advertising Campaigns Online Friends Determine the Persuasiveness of SNS Advertising Campaigns Marketers more and more design advertising campaigns especially for Social Network Sites (SNS), with the aim that SNS users forward these campaigns to their online network. By means of a survey, this study investigates whether the persuasiveness of such campaigns is determined by the strength of the social connection between receiver and the sender of the campaign. The results support the idea that SNS campaigns are more persuasive when forwarded by close friends, than when forwarded by less strong social connections. Thus, the social context plays a crucial role in the persuasiveness of marketing communication activities within SNS.

scholarly journals Beyond Productivity: Considering the Health, Social Value and Happiness of Home and Community Food Gardens

Urban Science ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 97 ◽  
Author(s):  
Georgia Pollard ◽  
Philip Roetman ◽  
James Ward ◽  
Belinda Chiera ◽  
Evangeline Mantzioris
Keyword(s):  
Online Survey ◽  
South Australia ◽  
Social Value ◽  
Social Connection ◽  
Health And Wellbeing ◽  
Supportive Role ◽  
The Social ◽  
Food Gardens ◽  
Food Gardening ◽  
Citizen Science Project

We are living in an age of concern for mental health and wellbeing. The objective of the research presented in this paper is to investigate the perceived health, social value and happiness benefits of urban agriculture (UA) by focusing on home and community food gardens in South Australia. The results reported in this paper are from “Edible Gardens”, a citizen science project designed to investigate the social value, productivity and resource efficiency of UA in South Australia. Methods include an online survey and in-field garden data collection. Key findings include: dominant home gardener motivations were the produce, enjoyment, and health, while dominant community gardener motivations were enjoyment, connection to others and the produce. Exploratory factor analysis revealed four key factors: Tranquillity and Timeout, Develop and Learn Skills, the Produce, and Social Connection. The key difference between home and community gardeners was an overall social connection. Although home gardeners did not appear to actively value or desire inter-household social connection, this does not mean they do not value or participate in other avenues of social connection, such as via social learning sources or by sharing food with others. The combined results from this research regarding health and wellbeing, social connection and happiness support the premise that engagement in home or community food gardening may provide a preventative or supportive role for gardener health and wellbeing, regardless of whether it is a conscious motivation for participation.

Towards a Postpatriarchal Family

1998 ◽  
pp. 105-112
Author(s):  
Patricia S. Mann
Keyword(s):  
Political Responsibility ◽  
Human Relationships ◽  
Child Relationship ◽  
Large Numbers ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Family ◽  
Widespread Phenomenon ◽  
Familial Relations ◽  
Work Family ◽  
Mother Child Relationship

Ours is a time of dramatic and confusing transformations in everyday life, many of them originating in the social enfranchisement of women that has occurred over the past twenty-five years. Sociologist Arlie Hochschild demonstrates a widespread phenomenon of work-family imbalance in our society, experienced by people in terms of a time bind, and a devaluation of familial relationships. As large numbers of women have moved into the workplace, familial relations of all sorts have been colonized by what Virginia Held critically refers to as the contractual paradigm. Even the mother/child relationship, representing for Held an alternative feminist paradigm of selfhood and agency, has been in large part "outsourced." I believe that an Arendtian conception of speech and action might enable us to assert anew the grounds for familial relations. If we require a new site upon which to address our human plurality and natality, the postpatriarchal family may provide that new site upon which individuals can freely act to recreate the fabric of human relationships. It would seem to be our moral and political responsibility as social philosophers today to speculatively contribute to the difficult yet imperative task of reconfiguring the family. In this paper, I attempt to articulate the basic assumptions from which such a reconfiguration must begin.

scholarly journals AT THE SOURCES OF OWNERSHIP (Historical and Anthropological Study)

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 424-430
Author(s):  
Yu. G. Pysarenko
Keyword(s):  
Field Of View ◽  
Social Connection ◽  
Anthropological Study ◽  
The Social ◽  
True Meaning ◽  
Social Principle ◽  
Important Sign ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Common Vision ◽  
Special Category

The advantage that the traditional cattle owner (at the beginning of the ХХ century) gave to watching his animals over money that «can only be hidden in a crate» allows us to reach the following conclusions regarding the archaic perception of ownership. 1) The fact that the original «object of possession» must always be in the field of view of his master, indicates the indivisibility of I, the lack of distinction between subject and object. There is a permanent coherent visual-communion relationship (visual field) between the conditional subject and the object, which is not desirable to disrupt, say, the killing of an animal (similarly, it is not desirable to leave the visible ancestral territory of a person). The continuity of this visual connection is an important sign of belonging to a particular society. 2) Since the vision (vision) does not yet constitute the ancient person as I (the subject), then the person seems to partake of the external visible picture of a particular kind of territory. To be a member of the lineage is to be sighted and, by virtue of sight, to partake of the flock, which is also native — «one’s own». 3) All «theirs» — people, animals, possessions — are united by common vision. In a special category are the socially significant things, which are most attracted the attention of the whole society, they seem to blend with the eyes of the collective. 4) Since social connection is first and foremost visual, and each genus-territory seems to have a «vision», due to the mutual gifting of such «things-eyes», probably a connection is established — a «common vision» between different genera-territories. Obviously, this was the true meaning of the archaic doormat of M. Moss and K. Levy-Strauss. 5) Blindness (a) deprives communion, b) equals whole-non-divisiveness (= no communion). 6) Obviously, the authorities are adjusting to the generic communion — vision — distribution (sociovitality). The lord, originally a stranger, establishes a social and visual connection with the subjugated population: he gives away gifts and is paid tribute. His «bright eyes» are considered «breadwinners» and potentially belong to society. 7) The death of the «light lord», who suddenly became dark-blind, contradicted the social principle of communion-visibility (sociovitality), and therefore required the immediate robbery and distribution of his fortune-eyes (obviously folk) — the breaking of the whole-blindness.

scholarly journals The CEO Role in New Zealand: Perceptions and Interpretative Schema - Tensions and Paradoxes

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Beverley McNally
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Empirical Work ◽  
Social Institution ◽  
Research Literature ◽  
The Body ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Theory Approach ◽  
Structural Process ◽  
The Social ◽  
Social Structural

<p>This thesis examines the perceptions of the CEO role in large New Zealand organisations. The study is a response to calls from scholars for more empirical work on executive leadership specifically, as it pertains to the CEO role, which scholars have identified as an under-researched and less clearly understood construct. A modified grounded theory approach was utilised to establish the research participants' perceptions of the CEO role. Specifically, this thesis focuses on how the participants interpret and construct meaning from the interactions occurring within their context. The sample for the study comprised 30 participants, 22 CEOs and 8 executives in non-CEO roles. The criteria for selection related to the position an individual held in an organisation. The individual was, or had been, a CEO in a large New Zealand organisation or was directly involved with the CEO role, for example, a board chairperson. The primary data were collected from semi-structured interviews of between one to two hours in duration. Informal interviews, company publications and documentation, and the relevant research literature supplemented the primary data. The concurrent data collection and analysis identified two interpretative schemas that guide and inform the CEO role. These were the leadership interpretative schema and the institutionalised interpretative schema. The participants in this study articulated theenactment of their leadership within the frame of the leadership interpretative schema. However, the predominant schema informing the CEO role was the institutionalised interpretative schema. The contact between the two schemas represented collisions. Such collisions, in turn, created a set of tensions and paradoxes for the CEO. In seeking a clearer explanation of these tensions and paradoxes, the study identified the basic social structural process of the CEO role as a social institution. This thesis re-conceptualises the CEO role as a social institution. As such it is a multifaceted construct with its own set of social norms that create, guide and sustain a socialorder governing the behaviour of the CEO. Situated within this social structural process the study identified the social psychological process balancing the tensions and paradoxes. The study identified that the CEOs perceived the need to be able to balance the tensions and paradoxes within their context if they are to enact their role effectively. In other words, an effective CEO is perceived as acting as a mediator, successfully mediating between the dualities created by the conflicting expectations of the two interpretative schemas. Establishing context as a primary factor within the study allowed the contextual factors that enhanced or inhibited the enactment of the CEO role in New Zealand to receive their due emphasis. Such a focus was responsible for allowing the social, cultural, legal and economic forces, within the context of the CEO, to be brought to the fore. These, in turn, were perceived by the participants as having their genesis within in the religious, economic and historical traditions of New Zealand's European colonialism, and in their responses to it. In this study, context is embraced as a means for allowing the voices of the participants to be brought forward and be heard, whereas, the concept of voice has been traditionally ascribed to the weak, minorities, and disadvantaged (Baez, 2002). Paradoxically, this research identified that CEOs perceive themselves as having little voice. This despite the perception, both within society and within organisations, that CEOs have considerable power and status and therefore have the ability to voice their 'true feelings'. The analysis identified that they perceive constraints and silencing with regard to certain aspects of their role, suggesting further research on the CEO responses to such constraints is required. The outcomes of this study have implications for research and practice. In terms of the former, there are opportunities for researchers to build on the findings of the study thereby, contributing to the body of knowledge. With regards to practice, the study raises implications for those involved in the governance function, policy-makers and those having responsibilities for the development of individuals to fill the CEO role.</p>

scholarly journals Odpowiedzialność polityczno-prawna Prezydenta Ukrainy

2020 ◽  
Vol 6(161) ◽  
pp. 145-168
Author(s):  
Andrzej Stec
Keyword(s):  
Legal Status ◽  
Legal Responsibility ◽  
The Political ◽  
Political Responsibility ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Basic Law ◽  
Head Of State ◽  
The Social ◽  
State Governance ◽  
Social Harmfulness

One of the democratic mechanisms of state governance is to define the political and legal responsibilities of the supreme state bodies. The type and scope of responsibility also determines the legal and constitutional position of the head of state. In the article, the author analyzes legal norms regarding the political and legal responsibility of the President of Ukraine. The examination of problems related to these norms is based on Ukrainian and foreign constitutional and statutory solutions. Political (parliamentary) responsibility is related to the relevance, legitimacy and purposefulness of decisions made by the person holding the office of President. It is assessed by the appointing or controlling body. Although the current legal status in Ukraine does not provide for the institution of the President’s political responsibility, such solutions were present during the political changes after the collapse of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Political responsibility of the Head of State in 1991–1993 was provided by the repeatedly amended Constitution of Soviet Ukraine (of 20 April 1978, as amended in Article 114-9(3)). The constitutional responsibility of the President in Ukraine is regulated in Article 111 of the Basic Law, which states that the Head of State is responsible for treason and other crimes, without however indicating the premises or grading the social harmfulness of these prohibited acts. The discussed problems related to the triple division of power, its exercise and legitimacy appear more and more often in Ukraine, Hungary, Poland and other countries of Central and Eastern Europe, affecting the security of the entire region.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document