2. 职称英语
  3. One of the principal of Walzer’s critique of liberal capitalism is that it i

One of the principal of Walzer’s critique of liberal capitalism is that it i

游客2024-11-25  45
问题     One of the principal of Walzer’s critique of liberal capitalism is that it is insufficiently egalitarian. Walzer’s case against the economic inequality generated by capitalism and in favor of "a radical redistribution of wealth" is presented in a widely cited essay entitled In Defense of Equality.
    The most striking feature of Walzer’s critique is that, far from rejecting the principle of reward according to merit, Walzer insists on its validity. People who excel should receive the superior benefits appropriate to their excellence. But people exhibit a great variety of qualities— "intelligence, physical strength, agility and grace, artistic creativity, mechanical skill, leadership, endurance, memory, psychological insight, the capacity for hard work—even moral strength, sensitivity, the ability to express compassion. "Each deserves its proper recompense and hence a proper distribution of material goods should reflect human differences as measured on all these different scales. Yet, under capitalism, the ability to make money("the green thumb of bourgeois society")enables its possessor to acquire almost "every other sort of social goods" such as the respect and esteem of others.
    The centerpiece of Walzer’s argument is the invocation of a quotation from Pascal’s Pensees, which concludes;"Tyranny is the wish to obtain by one means what can only be had by another. " Pascal believes that we owe different duties to different qualities. So we might say that infatuation is the proper response to charm, and awe the proper response to strength. In this light, Walzer characterizes capitalism as the tyranny of money(or of the ability to make it)and Walzer advocates as the means of eliminating this tyranny and of restoring genuine equality"the abolition of the power of money outside its sphere". What Walzer envisions is a society in which wealth is no longer convertible into social goods with which it has no intrinsic connection.
    Walzer’s argument is a puzzling one. After all, why should those qualities unrelated to the production of material goods be rewarded with material goods? Is it not tyrannical, in Pascal’s sense, to insist that those who excel in "sensitivity" or "the ability to express compassion" merit equal wealth with those who excel in qualities(such as "the capacity for hard work")essential in producing wealth? Yes. Walzer’s argument, however deficient, does point to one of the most serious weaknesses of capitalism—namely, that it brings to predominant positions in a society people who, no matter how legitimately they have earned their material rewards, often lack those other qualities that evoke affection or admiration. Some even argue plausibly that this weakness may be irremediable: in any society that, like a capitalist society, seeks to become ever wealthier in material terms disproportionate rewards are bound to flow to the people who are instrumental in producing the increase in its wealth. [br] The author mentions all of the following as issues addressed by Walzer EXCEPT______.
选项 A、proper reward for individual excellence
B、proper interpretation of "economic equality"
C、proper level of a society’s wealth grounds
D、proper exchange of money for social goods
答案 C
解析 细节题 第二段第二句指出，出类拔萃的人理应获取与他们卓越成就相称的利益。故[A]是沃尔泽论述的问题；开篇第二句指出，沃尔泽反对资本主义体制所导致的经济不平等并赞成一种根本性的财富重新分配，这一论点被表述于一篇广为引用的标题为《捍卫平等》的论文中。可见，沃尔泽认为应该正确解读经济上的平等，因此[B]也是沃尔泽论述的问题；第三段末句提到，沃尔泽所设想的是这样一个社会：在这个社会中物质财富将不再能转化成为与之绝无内在联系的社会商品，[D]是沃尔泽探讨的问题；只有[C]“社会物质财富基础的适当层面”在文中没有涉及，故为答案。
转载请注明原文地址:https://www.tihaiku.com/zcyy/3859946.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)