Kas kujutlused ideaalsed politseist on asjakohased? Siinviidatud vabalevis olev tekst võiks olla kohustuslikuks kirjanduseks kõikidele politseinikele ja politseivaldkonna korraldajatele.

Kontekstiks:

“For the most part, social and political philosophers have concerned themselves with three major institutions: economic systems, democratic systems of decision-making, and families.1 I argue here that institutions of enforcement, especially the police, are entitled to the status of “major” institution, even within the realm of ideal theory.” (Monaghan, 2022, p. 1)

Võimas avaldus, mille vastu on keeruline vaielda:

“Much of the developed world is now characterized by “government by policing” in the sense that our day-to-day is substantially determined by police action (Seo 2019). […] In particular, I’ll argue that the need for a certain kind of policing—“order maintenance policing”—survives methodologically attractive idealizations, and the supposition that ideal theory obviates the police comes from an overly narrow construal of the police as “law enforcers.”” (Monaghan, 2022, p. 2)

Moraalsed inglid …

“Whether we imagine individuals as fully compliant (or at least disposed to conditionally comply) with the rules of society or more strongly idealized as “moral angels” who are always highly motivated to do the right thing and work together peacefully and cooperatively, ideal theory typically posits no active role for the enforcement or administration of justice in society.” (Monaghan, 2022, p. 2)

Autor väidab:

“The claim in this paper is that philosophically interesting and methodologically attractive idealizations do not exclude policing, or some kind of agency that enforces or administers justice, from the set of major institutions.” (Monaghan, 2022, p. 2)

Olulise institutsiooni kolm eeltingumust:

“There are three criteria for an institution to count as major: they must (i) determine the kinds of lives we can live and (ii) produce deep inequalities that (iii) are not justified by merit or desert.” (Monaghan, 2022, p. 3)

Politseipraktikad võivad luua ebaõiglust:

“Second, law enforcement produces significant inequalities. For instance, interactions with police officers significantly affect individual well-being. Interactions with police can produce trauma and anxiety. More frequent, intrusive, or aggressive interactions, unsurprisingly, result in higher levels of trauma and anxiety (Geller et al. 2014).” (Monaghan, 2022, p. 4)

Seadusekuulekas olla on väga keeruline:

“Crucially, traffic violations arise even when motorists intend to follow the law. This is because, for one, perfect driving is difficult. It is also because traffic infrastructure often encourages illegal driving even in courteous and conscientious motorists.” (Monaghan, 2022, p. 6)

Vildakas eeldus:

“There’s a common mistake in ideal theorizing about justice: assume that individuals in their private roles are non-ideal while assuming that in their public roles they’re ideal and derive conclusions about just institutional structures from this assumption (Freiman 2017).” (Monaghan, 2022, p. 7)

Lugemishuvi suurendamiseks:

“The point of this illustration is that thinking about ideally just policing requires thinking “defensively” about the problems we are likely to encounter, ones that persist even in the face of various idealizations.” (Monaghan, 2022, p. 13)

Monaghan, J. (2022). Idealizations and ideal policing. Philosophers’ Imprint, 22, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3998/phimp.882