| Summary: | For this author, the articles on the vulnerability debate adopt points of view that are more complementary than antagonistic. In order to bring out the complementarity, he mobilizes two notions elaborated by Amartya Sen: positional objectivity, according to which each observer or analyst of a particular situation is characterised by a particular point of view, nevertheless objective, with regards to this reality (in function of the national or institutional context in which he is situated, of his own life history, etc.). Next, the concept of informational base of judgement in justice which points to the information to be considered when one attempts to evaluate a particular social situation. The article first identifies the differences between the two authors of the debate with regards to positional objectivities and informational bases. He then proposes another conception, grounded in Amartya Sen’s capacities approach, which suggests an alternative informational base in order to complete accessible knowledge of studied phenomena.
|
|---|
