RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색

인기 검색어

    다국어 입력

    http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

    변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

    예시)
    • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
    • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
    닫기
    KCI등재

    포용, 형평 그리고 평등 = Inclusion, Equity, and Equality

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A110297624

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
    • 오류접수
    인용문이 복사되었습니다.

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    The value and significance of the concept of equality appear to be increasingly attenuated in contemporary legal and political discourse. While few would deny that equality once functioned as a central normative ideal of modernity, it is no longer widely regarded as a primary guiding principle. Instead, concepts such as diversity, equity, and inclusion have come to occupy a more prominent place in legal and policy frameworks. Several factors help explain this shift. First, theoretical debates over the question of “equality of what” have fragmented the concept of equality into competing accounts of its proper object. Second, the notion of relative equality, with its emphasis on difference and proportionality, has increasingly served to justify inequalities associated with meritocracy. Third, substantive equality has either remained under-theorized in concrete terms or, in the process of elaboration, has absorbed auxiliary concepts that dilute its original meaning. At a practical level, equality-based legal claims have often failed to gain sufficient traction, due in part to political and social dynamics such as backlash. Nevertheless, inclusion and equity remain closely connected to the concept of equality and should be situated within its broader normative architecture. In particular, inclusion reveals its meaning and substance most clearly within the framework of political equality, while equity does so within the framework of substantive equality. From the perspective of political equality, inclusion should be understood not merely as formal access to democratic participation, but as the effective enhancement of individuals’ and groups’ political influence, thereby entailing a critical orientation toward the exercise of state power. Equity, by contrast, stands in opposition to formal equality and is best understood as a concept that realizes the demands of substantive equality in context-sensitive ways. Substantive equality, in turn, presupposes certain core structures of equality, including basic equality and equality of outcomes. In this sense, both inclusion and equity are ultimately grounded in political equality and substantive equality, which together constitute the conceptual core of the idea of equality.
    번역하기

    The value and significance of the concept of equality appear to be increasingly attenuated in contemporary legal and political discourse. While few would deny that equality once functioned as a central normative ideal of modernity, it is no longer wid...

    The value and significance of the concept of equality appear to be increasingly attenuated in contemporary legal and political discourse. While few would deny that equality once functioned as a central normative ideal of modernity, it is no longer widely regarded as a primary guiding principle. Instead, concepts such as diversity, equity, and inclusion have come to occupy a more prominent place in legal and policy frameworks. Several factors help explain this shift. First, theoretical debates over the question of “equality of what” have fragmented the concept of equality into competing accounts of its proper object. Second, the notion of relative equality, with its emphasis on difference and proportionality, has increasingly served to justify inequalities associated with meritocracy. Third, substantive equality has either remained under-theorized in concrete terms or, in the process of elaboration, has absorbed auxiliary concepts that dilute its original meaning. At a practical level, equality-based legal claims have often failed to gain sufficient traction, due in part to political and social dynamics such as backlash. Nevertheless, inclusion and equity remain closely connected to the concept of equality and should be situated within its broader normative architecture. In particular, inclusion reveals its meaning and substance most clearly within the framework of political equality, while equity does so within the framework of substantive equality. From the perspective of political equality, inclusion should be understood not merely as formal access to democratic participation, but as the effective enhancement of individuals’ and groups’ political influence, thereby entailing a critical orientation toward the exercise of state power. Equity, by contrast, stands in opposition to formal equality and is best understood as a concept that realizes the demands of substantive equality in context-sensitive ways. Substantive equality, in turn, presupposes certain core structures of equality, including basic equality and equality of outcomes. In this sense, both inclusion and equity are ultimately grounded in political equality and substantive equality, which together constitute the conceptual core of the idea of equality.

    더보기

    동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

    분석정보

    View

    상세정보조회

    0

    Usage

    원문다운로드

    0

    대출신청

    0

    복사신청

    0

    EDDS신청

    0

    동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

    더보기

    주제

    연도별 연구동향

    연도별 활용동향

    연관논문

    연구자 네트워크맵

    공동연구자 (7)

    유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼