nucleation

LIT-288: Capabilities as Fundamental Entitlements: Sen and Social Justice

1 min read

Properties6
StatusActive — read in full 2026-09-28 (NOTE-256); worth reading as the canonical short statement of the list-versus-no-list dispute inside the capability approach, and of Nussbaum's ten capabilities. It is argued by examples, not derived. Its threshold idea is announced but not worked out here.
Version2
Tagsethics, society-and-governance, social-science
ExtendsLIT-289 — Equality of What?
Cited as “paper” byNOTE-256 — Capabilities as Fundamental Entitlements: Sen and Social Justice
Cited as “source” byTHEORY-025 — Neither utility information nor resource holdings, alone or together, can register claims that arise from how differently people convert resources into what they can do and be: equal resources leave unequal capabilities, and utility adapts to deprivation

Graph View

Nussbaum (2003), Feminist Economics 9(2–3), 33–59 (2003); read as the author’s pre-publication version (“Forthcoming, Feminist Economics”), whose pagination differs — DOI-10.1080/1354570022000077926

Standing in the record

Filed on 2026-09-28 at the owner’s request, as one of nine texts assembled to represent Amartya Sen’s capability approach without a full reading of The Idea of Justice. published: is the first appearance (ADR-002).

It was filed Deferred, unread. NOTE-256 is the close reading of 2026-09-28, and it placed the work: Active — worth reading as the canonical short statement of the list-versus-no-list dispute inside the capability approach, and of Nussbaum’s ten capabilities. It is argued by examples, not derived. Its threshold idea is announced but not worked out here.

Backlinks