Not exact matches
He adds a pretty strong moral
argument for the right and justice of liberty, including in the economic realm, i.e., no Obama «
fairness.»
In
fairness, they probably are anyway, but only silverware will settle the
argument once and
for all.
Though I suppose, in
fairness, there's an
argument to be made
for saying that facebook posts should simply be off limits given that facebook does sometimes change privacy settings without the users» permission.
A politics of
fairness and equality is about both (i) making an
argument across the whole of society that a fairer and more equal society is in our collective enlightened self - interest, using the
arguments of Richard Wilkinson, etc on issues like crime, general well - being, and that there are benefits of
fairness for those at the top too.
Our inequality attitudes work suggests this broad «quality of life» case
for fairness and greater equality has quite a lot of resonance across social groups, and often more than a «who's got what»
argument about
fairness.
The irony is that Labour in Britain has last week been attacked in absurd, lurid terms over «class war»
for making the same
fairness argument as Obama.
Does this not introduce the need
for further nuance in the application of any reciprocity
argument, and further, the understanding of
fairness upon whcih it might be based?
If the result favours Labour, Clegg would need to adapt his
arguments and objectives accordingly introducing,
for example, a greater emphasis on social justice,
fairness, and collective responsibility.
This article is especially relevant today not only because it is a critical review of past research on moral education viewed through the lens and the work of the authors, but because it is also a critique of the current status of higher education and an
argument for the need to focus more intentionally on equity and
fairness.
All along Amazon has cloaked the
argument as a moral issue of consumer
fairness — its practically a straw man
for them to point and guide attention away from their own culpability.
In Z, Moor J adopted the negative
fairness test and held as follows: «I therefore reject all the
arguments raised to say that it would not be fair
for me to uphold the agreement in so far as it excludes sharing.
You can also raise the
argument that s. 6 (3) of the Arbitration Act (the equality term) is engaged here as well, since your
argument is that a failure to sufficiently screen
for power balances goes to the root of a concern
for equality and
fairness between the parties.
For the sake of
argument, we'll define ethics as the well - founded standards of right and wrong that prescribe what humans ought to do in terms of rights, obligations, benefits to society,
fairness, or specific virtues; the study and development of one's standards and beliefs to ensure they're reasonable and well - founded; and striving to ensure that we, and the institutions we help to shape, live up to standards that are reasonable and solidly - based.