2006 Volume 73 Issue 4 Pages 420-430
The base of social policy has become competition and efficiency since the 1980's. This policy expands the economic difference. It was recently pointed out that there are differences in education-difference in achievement, social mobility, choice of career-between children from the rich class and children from the poor class. This problem is argued mainly in the field of the distribution theory which studies about the way of just distribution of resources.
However, the purpose of this article is to study about the new approach to the problems of differences. It is the "capability approach" of M.C. Nussbaum. This approach grasps the difference in the field of "capability" and allows us to see the difference on which economic and distributive theory has given little attention. This paper examines the possibility and problem in the "capability approach" through studies about her idea of "capability".
Chapter 1 illustrates, with comparisons to the distributive theory of J. Rawls, why Nussbaum thinks the public policy must ground on "capability". The author thought that a theory of justice based only on the resources people should have was inadequate when it was not guided by the conception of what people do with the resources. She insisted that we have to think about what is the good for humans. The difference is grasped in the good not in the goods. The good, the idea comes mainly from Aristotle study of "eudaimonia" and Marx's view of human, is the life that is worthy of the dignity of the human being. She sees the life from the viewpoint of the human function that characterized us just as humans.
Chapter 2 surveys the idea of "capability". The author thought that it was important to decide and to choose the way of life by oneself. So the aim of politics is "capability" not "functioning". This term derives from Aristotle's word "dunamis" and means having the opportunities for functioning. She defines three types capabilities, basic, internal, combined. Therefore "capability" can show which and how many goods people needs. That is to say "capability" means not only innate equipment but also states of the world external to the person's condition. The distributive theory of Rawls cannot clear that social context when we use goods. Moreover, the author propounds us the threshold of the good human life as basic social minimum with the list of ten central human capabilities.
Chapter 3 considers the relationship between the "capability approach" and education. The "inner capability" develops by education. However, Nussbaum insists that the educational goal must be functioning in childhood to produce mature adult capability. Because children do not have much knowledge of good human life, they do not develop practical reasoning. Thus, the aim of education is to form a conception of the good and to engage in critical reflection about the planning of one's life in the capability approach.
The "capability approach" can see people in their social context. Therefore it has the possibility to truly realize the fair equality of opportunity. However it has problems about how to decide the threshold level and what functions must be filled during childhood.
