Rethinking neutrality: a conceptual analysis

This article attempts to determine whether there exists a coherent, plausible, and ultimately compelling explication of what it is act neutrally. I argue that – an account label neutrality volition, according which actor acts non-neutrally where she either for the purpose differentially helping or hindering particular party in given contest, belief substantial likelihood her action will have this effect. Along way, suggest political philosophers concerned with justice requires state’s laws policies be publicly justifiable, as well legal commentators who note oftentimes general application disparate impacts, would do cease framing their arguments language neutrality. conclude by arguing debate over proper interpretation not merely matter semantics. Having identified aligns our ordinary understanding concept, also internally consistent, we access conceptual tool can use make better sense wide array actions sphere beyond, while avoiding unhelpful conflation distinct concepts such fairness, public justifiability, anti-perfectionism, equal impact, non-discrimination.