Handout 8, 8 March 2023

Class Discussion

1. Review Amartya Sen’s parable of Annapurna, Dinu, Bishanno, and Rogini (pp. 54 – 56).
What is Sen trying to critique or explain via the parable?
2.
 The parable suggests that individuals with greater resources or power should use
their position to help uplift and empower others, rather than solely seeking to
maximize their own self-interest. This has implications for global governance and the
distribution of resources, as those with greater power and resources must take
responsibility for ensuring that the basic needs of all individuals are met.
 The parable also highlights the importance of collaboration and cooperation across
borders and cultural boundaries. In an increasingly interconnected world, global
governance requires cooperation and shared responsibility to address poverty,
inequality, and environmental degradation.
 Moreover, the parable suggests that global governance should not simply focus on
economic growth or material prosperity but should also consider non-material
values such as community, relationships, and human connection. This affects how
global governance should be structured and what values should guide decision-
making processes.
 Overall, the parable of Annapurna, Dinu, Bishanno, and Rogini promotes an ethical
and global governance framework that prioritizes compassion, fairness, cooperation,
and a holistic approach to well-being and development.

3. What are “functionings,” according to Sen? And what does he mean by a person’s
“capability”? (pp. 74 – 86)
 In the context of Amartya Sen's capabilities approach, functioning refers to what an
individual is able to do or be. It is a measure of an individual's freedom or capability
to live a fulfilling life.
 Sen argues that traditional approaches to development, which focus solely on
economic growth or material prosperity, fail to capture the full range of factors that
contribute to human well-being. Instead, Sen proposes that development should be
focused on expanding an individual's capabilities, or their ability to do and be what
they value.
 According to Sen, capabilities can be understood as a person's real opportunities to
achieve valuable functionings, which are the actual things that people are able to do
or be. Examples of functionings include being healthy, having access to education
and employment, having the ability to participate in political decision-making, and
having social connections.
 Sen argues that it is not enough to simply provide individuals with material resources
or income; rather, development should focus on enabling individuals to achieve
valuable functionings by expanding their capabilities. This can be achieved through
investments in education, healthcare, social services, and other areas that enhance
people's opportunities to achieve what they value.
 In summary, functioning in Sen's capabilities approach refers to the actual things
that people are able to do or be, while capabilities refer to an individual's freedom or
ability to achieve those functionings.

1
 Handout 8, 8 March 2023

4. Sen defines poverty as capability deprivation (Sen, chapter 4). In your view, does Pogge
hold a similar “Sen-like” definition of poverty? Why or why not?
 Yes, Thomas Pogge shares a similar "Sen-like" definition of poverty as capability
deprivation. Pogge argues that poverty is not just a lack of resources or income, but
rather a condition of deprivation that limits individuals' abilities to live fulfilling lives.
 According to Pogge, poverty is a condition in which individuals lack the basic
capabilities necessary for a decent life, such as access to education, healthcare, and
clean water. This deprivation is not simply a matter of lacking resources, but is often
the result of systemic injustices and inequalities in the global economic and political
system.
 Like Sen, Pogge argues that poverty is a violation of basic human rights, and that
global governance has a responsibility to address poverty and promote human
development. He argues that this requires a shift away from a focus on economic
growth and towards a focus on human development and social justice.
 However, while Sen's capabilities approach focuses on expanding individuals'
freedom and ability to achieve what they value, Pogge's approach emphasizes the
importance of addressing systemic injustices and inequalities in the global economic
and political system. He argues that global governance must work to reform the
global economic order in order to promote human development and address
poverty.
 In summary, while Pogge's definition of poverty is similar to Sen's, he places greater
emphasis on the systemic causes of poverty and the need for global governance to
address these root causes in order to promote human development and social
justice.

5. “[H]uman rights violations come in two varieties, one of which has – unsurprisingly –
been overlooked. There is the interactional variety, where individual or collective agents
do things that, as they intend, foresee, or should foresee, will avoidably deprive human
beings of secure access to the objects of their human rights. And there is the institutional
variety, where agents design and impose institutional arrangements that, as they intend,
foresee, or should foresee, will avoidably deprive human beings of secure access to their
human rights. That the latter variety is overlooked among those who enjoy the privilege
of theorizing about justice and human rights is related to the fact that its recognition
would bring into full view a large crime against humanity that is now going on and in
which these theorists and their readers are involved. This crime is the design and
imposition of unjust supranational institutional arrangements that foreseeably and
avoidably cause at least half of all severe poverty which in turn is by far the greatest
contributor to the current global human rights deficit” (Pogge, 28).

In this passage, Pogge claims that ordinary citizens of developed countries—including

perhaps some of us in this classroom—are in effect involved in “a large crime against
humanity.” Do you agree with Pogge? Discuss as a group and write your response on the
board. Be prepared to respond to possible objections from other groups.

2
 Handout 8, 8 March 2023

 Pogge argues that individuals in developed countries who benefit from unjust
supranational institutional arrangements are complicit in human rights violations
that cause severe poverty, the largest contributor to the current global human rights
deficit. He argues that these individuals commit crimes against humanity because
they contribute to and benefit from a system that deprives others of their basic
human rights.

 While this is a controversial claim, Pogge's argument highlights the systemic nature
of poverty and the role that global governance and institutional arrangements play in
perpetuating it. He argues that addressing poverty and promoting human rights
requires not just individual actions but also structural reforms and changes in the
global economic and political system.
 Ultimately, whether one agrees with Pogge's claim that individuals in developed
countries are involved in a crime against humanity depends on one's perspective on
the nature of human rights, poverty, and global governance. However, his argument
does raise important questions about the responsibilities of individuals and
institutions in addressing poverty and promoting human rights, and highlights the
need for a more comprehensive and systemic approach to addressing these issues.

There are different ways to object to Pogge's argument that individuals in developed
countries are involved in a "crime against humanity" due to their complicity in unjust
supranational institutional arrangements that cause severe poverty. Here are a few
possible objections:

 Attribution of responsibility: Pogge's argument implies that individuals in developed

countries are morally responsible for the poverty caused by unjust supranational
institutional arrangements. However, it may be argued that this attribution of
responsibility is overly broad and ignores other factors that contribute to poverty,
such as domestic policies, corruption, and natural disasters.
 Causality and complexity: Pogge's argument also assumes a direct causal link
between unjust supranational institutional arrangements and poverty, without
considering the complexity of factors that contribute to poverty. It may be argued
that poverty is a multifaceted and complex phenomenon that cannot be reduced to
the actions of specific agents or institutions.
 Ethical implications: Pogge's argument raises ethical questions about the
responsibilities of individuals and institutions in promoting human rights and
reducing poverty. However, it may be argued that his approach relies on a particular
ethical framework that is not universally accepted, and that different ethical
perspectives may lead to different conclusions about the best ways to address
poverty and promote human rights.

These are just a few possible objections to Pogge's argument, and there may be
others depending on one's perspective and theoretical framework. It is important to
engage in critical thinking and evaluation of arguments in order to arrive at a more
nuanced understanding of complex issues such as poverty and human rights.

3
 Handout 8, 8 March 2023

Lesson objectives
 Understand the debates surrounding the contested nature of the word “poverty.”
 Understand the globalized nature of the causes of domestic poverty.