Many translated example sentences containing "exploitation" – German-English dictionary and search engine for German translations. Übersetzung im Kontext von „exploitation“ in Französisch-Deutsch von Reverso Context: exploitation agricole, chaque exploitation, exploitation commerciale. exploitation [ɛksplwatasjɔ͂] SUBST f. 1. exploitation (action d'exploiter): exploitation.
Exploitation Testen Sie Ihren Wortschatz mit unseren lustigen Bild-Quiz.
Exploitation ist das englische Wort für „Ausbeutung“, „Verwertung“ und „Nutzbarmachung“. „Exploitationfilm“ wird im Deutschen und Englischen als Fachbegriff. Exploitationfilm (von engl. exploitation → „Nutzbarmachung“ oder auch „Ausbeutung“) ist eine kategorisierende Bezeichnung für Filme, die reißerische. De très nombreux exemples de phrases traduites contenant "exploitation" – Dictionnaire allemand-français et moteur de recherche de traductions allemandes. exploitation Bedeutung, Definition exploitation: 1. the use of something in order to get an advantage from it: 2. the act of using someone unfairly.  Wikipedia-Artikel „Exploitation“. Quellen: ↑ Duden. Das große Fremdwörterbuch. Herkunft und Bedeutung der Fremdwörter. 4., aktualisierte Auflage. Many translated example sentences containing "exploitation" – German-English dictionary and search engine for German translations. exploitation [ɛksplwatasjɔ͂] SUBST f. 1. exploitation (action d'exploiter): exploitation.
exploitation [ɛksplwatasjɔ͂] SUBST f. 1. exploitation (action d'exploiter): exploitation. exploitation Bedeutung, Definition exploitation: 1. the use of something in order to get an advantage from it: 2. the act of using someone unfairly. Exploitation ist das englische Wort für „Ausbeutung“, „Verwertung“ und „Nutzbarmachung“. „Exploitationfilm“ wird im Deutschen und Englischen als Fachbegriff. traduction exploitation dans le dictionnaire Francais - Allemand de Reverso, voir aussi 'exploitation',exploitant',exploration',exploitation minière', conjugaison. Übersetzung im Kontext von „exploitation“ in Französisch-Deutsch von Reverso Context: exploitation agricole, chaque exploitation, exploitation commerciale. Definition, Rechtschreibung, Synonyme und Grammatik von 'Exploitation' auf Duden online nachschlagen. Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache.
Exploitation Navigation menu VideoBe Careful! These 9 Signs Mean Someone Is Exploiting You
Marx had ignored capital inputs due to placing them all together in constant capital—translating the wear and tear of capital in production in terms of its labour value.
Yet examples such as this demonstrated that value and surplus value could come from somewhere other than labour. The theory has been opposed by Eugen Böhm von Bawerk , among others.
In History and Critique of Interest Theories , he argues that capitalists do not exploit their workers, as they actually help employees by providing them with an income well in advance of the revenue from the goods they produced, stating: "Labor cannot increase its share at the expense of capital".
In particular, he argues that the theory of exploitation ignores the dimension of time in production.
From this criticism, it follows that, according to Böhm-Bawerk, the whole value of a product is not produced by the worker, but that labour can only be paid at the present value of any foreseeable output.
John Roemer studied and criticized Marx's theory by putting forth a model to deal with exploitation in all modes of production, hoping to lay the foundations for an analysis of the laws of motion of socialism.
In his works published in the s, Roemer posits a model of exploitation based upon unequal ownership of human physical labour skills and non-human property land and means of production.
He states that this model of property rights has great superiority over the conventional surplus labour model of exploitation, therefore rejecting the labour theory of value.
Roemer rejects the labour theory of value because he sees that exploitation can exist in the absence of employment relations, like in a subsistence economy, therefore backing the model of exploitation that is based on property rights.
He tests his theory of exploitation using game theory to construct contingently feasible alternative states where the exploited agents could improve their welfare by withdrawing with their share of society's alienable and inalienable assets.
There has been a range of agreement and disagreement from various economists, neo-classical economists favoring the model the most.
Some theorists criticize Roemer for his entire rejection of the labour theory of value and the surplus labour approach to exploitation, for they were the central aspects of Marxist thought in regard to exploitation.
Many assume that liberalism intrinsically lacks any adequate theory of exploitation because its phenomenon commits itself only to the primacy of personal rights and liberties and to individual choice as the basic explanatory datum.
Hillel Steiner provided an argument to refute the claim that liberalism cannot supply an adequate theory of exploitation.
Exchange is the only of the three that consists of a voluntary bilateral transfer, where the beneficiary receives something at a value greater than zero on the shared scale of value, although at times there can be ambiguity between more complex types of transfer.
Despite these types of transfers being able to distinguish the differences in the four types of transfers, it is not enough to provide a differentiating characterization of exploitation.
Unlike theft, an exploitative transfer is bilateral and the items are transferred voluntarily at both unequal and greater-than-zero value.
The difference between a benefit and exploitation despite their various shared features is a difference between their counterfactual presuppositions, meaning that in an exploitation there is a voluntary bilateral transfer of unequally valued items because the possessors of both items would voluntarily make the transfer if the items to be transferred were of equal value, but in a benefit the possessor of the higher-value item would not voluntarily make the transfer if the items were at equal value.
Put simply, the exploitation can be converted to an exchange: both exploiters and exploited would voluntarily become exchangers when benefactors would not.
In an exploitation both transfers are voluntary, but part of one of the two transfers is unnecessary. The circumstances that bring out exploitation are not the same as what brings about exploitative transfers.
Exploitative circumstance is due to the factors other than what motivates individuals to engage in nonaltruistic bilateral transfers exchanges and exploitations as they are not sufficient circumstances to bring about exploitative transfers.
To further explain the occurrence of exploitative circumstances certain generalizations about social relations must be included to supply generalizations about social institutions.
He says that 'if i certain things are true of the institutions within which interpersonal transfers occur and ii at least some of these transfers are nonaltruistic bilateral ones, then at least some of these transfers are exploitative.
Institutional exploitation can be illustrated by schematized forms of exploitation to reach two points:.
On a liberal view, exploitation can be described as a quadrilateral relation between four relevantly distinct parties: the state, the exploited, the exploiter and those who suffer rights violations.
However, it can be argued that the state's interests with the exploiters action can be viewed as unimpeachable because you cannot imply that the exploiter would ever withhold consent from exploiting due to altruistic concerns.
So this trilateral conception of exploitation identifies exploited, exploiters and sufferers of rights violations.
In terms of ridding exploitation, the standard liberal view holds that a regime of laissez-faire is a necessary condition. Natural rights thinkers Henry George and Herbert Spencer reject this view and claim that property rights belong to everyone, i.
Their argument aims to show that traditional liberalism is mistaken in holding that nonintervention in commerce is the key to non exploitation and they argue it is necessary, but not sufficient.
The classical liberal Adam Smith described the exploitation of labour by businessmen, who work together to extract as much wealth as possible out of their workers, thusly:.
What are the common wages of labour, depends everywhere upon the contract usually made between those two parties, whose interests are by no means the same.
The workmen desire to get as much, the masters to give as little as possible. The former are disposed to combine in order to raise, the latter in order to lower the wages of labour.
The majority of neoclassical economists only would view exploitation existing as an abstract deduction of the classic school and of Ricardo's theory of surplus-value.
Exploitation is sometimes viewed to occur when a necessary agent of production receives less wages than its marginal product. However, it is not true that neoclassical economists would accept the marginal productivity theory of just income as a general principle like other theorists do when addressing exploitation.
The general neoclassical view sees that all factors can be simultaneously rewarded according to their marginal productivity: this means that factors of production should be awarded according to their marginal productivity as well, Euler's theorem for homogeneous function of the first order proves this:.
The production function where K is capital and L is labour. Neoclassical theory requires that f be continuously differentiable in both variables and that there are constant returns to scale.
If there are constant returns to scale, there will be perfect equilibrium if both capital and labour are rewarded according to their marginal products, exactly exhausting the total product.
The primary concept is that there is exploitation towards a factor of production, if it receives less than its marginal product. Exploitation can only occur in imperfect capitalism due to imperfect competition, with the neoclassical notion of productivity wages there is little to no exploitation in the economy.
Developing nations , commonly called Third World countries, are the focus of much debate over the issue of exploitation, particularly in the context of the global economy.
Critics [ who? It is argued that this is insufficient to allow workers to attain the local subsistence standard of living if working hours common in the First World are observed, so that working hours much longer than in the first world are necessary.
Others argue that in the absence of compulsion the only way that corporations are able to secure adequate supplies of labour is to offer wages and benefits superior to preexisting options and that the presence of workers in corporate factories indicates that the factories present options which are seen as better—by the workers themselves—than the other options available to them see principle of revealed preference.
A common response is that this is disingenuous as the companies are in fact exploiting people by the terms of unequal human standards applying lower standards to their Third World workers than to their First World ones.
It also argued that if a company intends to sell its products in the First World, it should pay its workers by First World standards.
Following such a view, some [ who? They believe that such standards would improve the quality of life in less developed nations.
According to others, this would harm the economies of less developed nations by discouraging the United States from investing in them.
Harmon allowed its customers to pay for drugs and child exploitation websites, to support counterfeiting and fraudulent activities as well as back neo-Nazi groups, according to the enforcement action.
Here's what he found," 19 Oct. Send us feedback. See more words from the same year Dictionary Entries near exploitation exploded explodent exploit exploitation exploitative exploitatory exploited.
Accessed 2 Nov. More from Merriam-Webster on exploitation Nglish: Translation of exploitation for Spanish Speakers Britannica English: Translation of exploitation for Arabic Speakers Comments on exploitation What made you want to look up exploitation?
Please tell us where you read or heard it including the quote, if possible. Test Your Knowledge - and learn some interesting things along the way.
Subscribe to America's largest dictionary and get thousands more definitions and advanced search—ad free! We'll try to clear it up. We're intent on clearing it up 'Nip it in the butt' or 'Nip it in the bud'?
We're gonna stop you right there Literally How to use a word that literally drives some pe The socialization of the Standard Oil industry would simply mean the elimination of capitalistic control and exploitation.
Instruction improves the cattle to be exploited but the exploitation remains. Use your prescient powers to get a perfect score on the Words of the Day from October 26—November 1, !
Origin of exploitation From French, dating back to —; see origin at exploit 2 , -ation. Words nearby exploitation explode , exploded view , explodent , exploding star , exploit , exploitation , exploitation film , exploitative , exploration , explorationist , exploratory.
Example: The exploitation of workers to maximize profit is sadly widespread. Did you know The hardest working person in the world likely lives in poverty Hard work almost never translates into huge wealth.
The hard work myth needs to die — The Pileus thepileus June 11, Human rights abuses, poverty pay and hellish working conditions in the developing world, pollution and waste, exploitation all along the supply chain: your cheap clothes come at a huge cost, for other people pennys — John Maguire JMaguireCritic June 12, So again the people want to feel honestly part of this land and companies want the ability to exploit it without regard.
The word exploitation is always used in a negative way. Words related to exploitation using , bleeding , profiteering.
Example sentences from the Web for exploitation Exploitation of trafficking victims may be most acute in conflict and adjoining regions, but it is not confined to these areas.
The American Empire Scott Nearing. Cannibals all! George Fitzhugh.
An exploitation film about homosexuality, Children of Loneliness , is now believed lost. A string of low-budget juvenile delinquent films featuring hot-rods and motorcycles followed in the s.
The success of American International Pictures' The Wild Angels in ignited a more robust trend that continued into the early s.
Black exploitation films, or "blaxploitation" films, are made with black actors, ostensibly for black audiences, often in a stereotypically black American urban milieu.
A prominent theme was black Americans overcoming hostile authority " The Man " through cunning and violence. The Bond film Live and Let Die uses blaxploitation themes.
Cannibal films are graphic movies from the early s to the late s, primarily made by Italian and Spanish moviemakers.
They focus on cannibalism by tribes deep in the South American or Asian rainforests. This cannibalism is usually perpetrated against Westerners that the tribes held prisoner.
As with mondo films , the main draw of cannibal films was the promise of exotic locales and graphic gore involving living creatures. The best-known film of this genre is the controversial Cannibal Holocaust , in which six real animals were killed.
Others include Cannibal Ferox , Eaten Alive! The Green Inferno is a modern homage to the genre. The phenomenon emerged in , when the government of Canada introduced new regulations to jumpstart the then-underdeveloped Canadian film industry, increasing the Capital Cost Allowance tax credit from 60 per cent to per cent.
The period ended in , when the Capital Cost Allowance was reduced to 50 per cent, although films that had entered production under the program continued to be released for another few years afterward.
Carsploitation films feature scenes of cars racing and crashing, featuring the sports cars, muscle cars , and car wrecks that were popular in the s and s.
They were produced mainly in the United States and Australia. The quintessential film of this genre is Vanishing Point Baby Driver and Death Proof are modern tributes to this genre containing some references to Vanishing Point , the latter also being a tribute to slasher films and the films of Russ Meyer.
In the s, a revisionist, non-traditional style of samurai film achieved some popularity in Japan. It became known as chambara , an onomatopoeia describing the clash of swords.
Its origins can be traced as far back as Akira Kurosawa , whose films feature moral grayness [ clarification needed ] and exaggerated violence, but the genre is mostly associated with s samurai manga by Kazuo Koike , on whose work many later films would be based.
Chambara features few of the stoic, formal sensibilities of earlier jidaigeki films — the new chambara featured revenge-driven antihero protagonists, nudity, sex scenes, swordplay, and blood.
Giallo films are Italian-made slasher films that focus on cruel murders and the subsequent search for the killers.
They are named for the Italian word for yellow, giallo , the background color featured on the covers of the pulp novels by which these movies were inspired.
Wardh , Blood and Black Lace and Tenebrae. The Argentinian film Sonno Profondo is a modern tribute to the genre.
Luigi Cozzi . Mockbusters, sometimes called "remakesploitation films", are copycat movies that try to cash in on the advertising of heavily promoted films from major studios.
Production company the Asylum , which prefers to call them "tie-ins", is a prominent producer of these films. The latter two used scenes from Star Wars and unauthorized excerpts from John Williams ' score.
Mondo films, often called shockumentaries, are quasi-documentary films about sensationalized topics like exotic customs from around the world or gruesome death footage.
The goal of mondo films, as of shock exploitation, is to shock the audience by dealing with taboo subject matter. These "nature-run-amok" films focus on an animal or group of animals, far larger and more aggressive than usual for their species, terrorizing humans while another group of humans tries to fight back.
This genre began in the s, when concern over nuclear weapons testing made movies about giant monsters popular. These were typically either giant prehistoric creatures awakened by atomic explosions or ordinary animals mutated by radiation.
The trend was revived in the s as awareness of pollution increased and corporate greed and military irresponsibility were blamed for destruction of the environment.
Hedorah are examples. After Steven Spielberg 's film Jaws , a number of very similar films sometimes regarded as outright rip-offs were produced in the hope of cashing in on its success.
Roger Corman was a major producer of these films in both decades. The genre has experienced a revival in recent years, as films like Mulberry Street and Larry Fessenden's The Last Winter reflected concerns about global warming and overpopulation.
Nazi exploitation films, also called "Nazisploitation" films, or "il sadiconazista", focus on Nazis torturing prisoners in death camps and brothels during World War II.
The tortures are often sexual, and the prisoners, who are often female, are nude. The progenitor of this subgenre was Love Camp 7 The archetype of the genre, which established its popularity and its typical themes, was Ilsa, She Wolf of the SS , about the buxom, nymphomaniacal dominatrix Ilsa torturing prisoners in a Stalag.
Inglourious Basterds and The Devil's Rock are modern homages to the subgenre. Nudist films originated in the s as films that skirted the Hays Code restrictions on nudity by purportedly depicting the naturist lifestyle.
New York Board of Regents that onscreen nudity is not obscene. This opened the door to more open depictions of nudity, starting with Russ Meyer's The Immoral Mr.
Teas , which has been credited as the first film to place its exploitation elements unapologetically at the forefront instead of pretending to carry a moral or educational message.
This development paved the way for the more explicit exploitation films of the s and s and made the nudist genre obsolete—ironically, since the nudist film Garden of Eden was the subject of the court case.
After this, the nudist genre split into subgenres such as the "nudie-cutie", which featured nudity but no touching, and the "roughie", which included nudity and violent, antisocial behavior.
Nudist films were marked by self-contradictory qualities. They presented themselves as educational films, but exploited their subject matter by focusing mainly on the nudist camps ' most beautiful female residents, while denying the existence of such exploitation.
They depicted a lifestyle unbound by the restrictions of clothing, yet this depiction was restricted by the requirement that genitals should not be shown.
Still, there was a subversive element to them, as the nudist camps inherently rejected modern society and its values regarding the human body.
One scene in The Unashamed makes a point about the artificiality of clothing and its related values through a mocking portrayal of a group of nude artists who paint fully clothed subjects.
The term "Ozploitation" refers broadly to Australian horror, erotic or crime films of the s and s. Changes to Australia's film classification system in led to the production of a number of such low-budget, privately-funded films, assisted by tax exemptions and targeting export markets.
Often an internationally-recognised actor but of waning notability would be hired to play a lead role. Laconic characters and desert scenes feature in many Ozploitation films, but the term has been used for a variety of Australian films of the era that relied on shocking or titillating their audiences.
The films typically have rural or outback settings, depicting the Australian landscape and environment as an almost spiritually malign force that alienates white Australians, frustrating their personal ambitions and activities, and their attempts to subdue it.
This genre contains films in which a person is raped, left for dead, recovers and then exacts a graphic, gory revenge against the rapists.
It is not unusual for the main character in these films to be a successful, independent city woman, who is attacked by a man from the country.
Clover , whose book Men, Women, and Chainsaws: Gender in the Modern Horror Film examines the implications of its reversals of cinema's traditional gender roles.
This type of film can be seen as an offshoot of the vigilante film, with the victim's transformation into avenger as the key scene.
Author Jacinda Read and others believe that rape—revenge should be categorized as a narrative structure rather than a true subgenre, because its plot can be found in films of many different genres, such as thrillers Ms.
The Redsploitation genre concerns Native American characters almost always played by white actors, usually exacting their revenge on their white tormentors.
Sexploitation films resemble softcore pornography. Films in this genre are an excuse for showing scenes involving nude or semi-nude women.
Many movies contain vivid sex scenes, but sexploitations are more graphic than mainstream films. When sexploitations are plot-driven, most of the plot could include killers, slavery, fem-dom , martial-arts, similar style and lines from glamour and screwball comedies, features love interests and flirtation akin to romance films , over-the-top direction, like cheeky homages, fan service and caricatures, and broad performances that may contain sleazy teasing and alluding to foreplay or kink.
But when the verb is applied to people, it is always used negatively. Exploitation can also be used in a way that means the use of something, especially for profit, as in Since we have these resources, we should make sure that the exploitation of them maximizes revenue.
Still, exploitation is most commonly used in a negative way. One phrase in which it has this negative sense is exploitation film , a low-budget movie characterized by extreme violence, excessive gore, gratuitous sex, or other content meant to shock, disgust, or titillate.
The related term blaxploitation refers to the exploitation of Black people and stereotypes about them, especially in movies featuring or intending to appeal to Black people.
The first records of the word exploitation come from right around Exploitation is most often used negatively, especially when it refers to taking advantage of people.
It is often used in the context of the exploitation of workers by businesses that underpay and overwork them, or take advantage of them in other ways.
Poor people and people of color are often targets of such exploitation. What are some other forms related to exploitation?
What are some words that share a root or word element with exploitation? Exploitation is most commonly used in a negative way, especially in the context of people who are being exploited for profit.
Hard work almost never translates into huge wealth. But exploitation of working people often does. The hard work myth needs to die.
Nevertheless, the transaction is one from which both parties emerge better off relative to how they would have been, had the transaction not taken place.
But so has the buyer. In this way, exploitation is importantly different from coercion, even though both coercion and exploitation can involve individuals accepting proposals that appear to make them better off relative to some baseline.
But she would be better off still if the mugger had never showed up to make her proposal at all. In contrast, the stranded hiker would be considerably worse off if her exploiter never showed up.
Coercion characteristically involves threats by which the coercer proposes to make her victim worse off unless she does as the coercer demands.
Exploitation, in contrast, often involves offers by which the exploiter proposes to make her victim better off if she does as the exploiter proposes.
There is, however, one important sense in which even an exploiter could be said to harm her victim.
Relative to a baseline of no transaction at all, exploitation often makes its victim better off. But relative to a baseline of a fair transaction, exploitation leaves its victim worse off.
Exploitation therefore does not necessarily harm its victim in the sense of making her worse off than she would have been, had the exploiter never interacted with her at all.
Rather, it makes its victim worse off than she should have been, had she been treated fairly. But these details probably do not matter much as far as our all-things-considered moral evaluation is concerned.
Whether we choose to say that exploitation involves A making B better off, but not as much better off as A should have made B ; or whether we say that it involves making B worse off than B should have been, the final verdict is the same Wertheimer 22— In the sense in which we are using the term, exploitation necessarily conceptually involves unfairness.
Our sense of exploitation is thus a moralized term. To judge that someone is engaged in exploitation is already to pass a moral judgment on them—to say that they are acting wrongly at least in a pro tanto sense.
As we noted at the beginning of this entry, some ordinary language use of the term implies no moral judgment whatsoever. And it is possible to develop a philosophically sophisticated account of exploitation that is relevant to moral judgment, without being moralized Goodin Still, even if exploitation is not conceptually unfair, it is characteristically so.
In some cases, this unfairness is the result of some procedural defect in the transaction—call this procedural unfairness. In other cases, the unfairness is a feature of what is agreed to, rather than how the agreement is reached—call this substantive unfairness.
So, for instance, if A deceives B regarding the nature of the good A is selling, in a way that leads B to pay more for that good than B otherwise would have, we can say that A has taken unfair advantage of B —that A has exploited B.
But while we can correctly say that A has exploited B in these situations, we could also say, more directly and more clearly, that A has defrauded or coerced B.
At least when A creates the defect from which he benefits, we usually have a better term available to describe the specific form of his wrongdoing.
But he does not coerce him, nor does he necessarily deceive him. In these cases, exploitation seems to be the most apt description for the wrongdoing.
There is widespread agreement among philosophers and legal theorists on the broad categories of behavior that render a transaction procedurally unfair, even if there is as always persistent disagreement about borderline cases of coercion, fraud, etc.
In contrast, there is much less agreement regarding those conditions that render a transaction substantively unfair.
One of the most intuitively appealing criteria of fairness in exchange is equality. A fair exchange, it is tempting to say, is an equal exchange.
But equal in terms of what? Although Marx took pains to deny he was giving an account of justice let alone fairness , much of the intuitive force of his account of labor exploitation seems to rely on the idea that a fair exchange will embody equal transfers of socially necessary labor.
It is because the objects produced by the worker embody more socially necessary labor than the wages he receives in exchange for producing those objects that the laborer is exploited.
And other late th century theorists such as Josiah Warren and Stephen Pearl Andrews made this moral claim explicit. Andrews 52— But even though a theory of labor-time as the basis of fair exchange is in principle distinguishable from a labor theory of economic value, the former is subject to many of the same problems as the latter.
How, for instance, should the difference between skilled and unskilled labor time be accounted for in determining a fair exchange?
Between easy and difficult labor? Labor is not homogenous, and this makes it ill-suited to serve as a currency of fair exchange.
If labor is the wrong place to look for a criterion of fair exchange, perhaps economic value would be better. A fair trade, on this view, involves the exchange of equally valuable goods or services.
And an unfair trade involves the exchange of goods or services of unequal value. B is giving up far more than she gains in exchange.
Or is she? Once we give up on the 19 th century notion that economic value is an objective property of commodities, and embrace instead that value is a function of the subjective preferences of economic agents, the problem with this analysis becomes readily apparent.
Economic exchange is only possible precisely because different agents assign different values to the same object. Our preferences simply differ, and so it is possible for us to both walk away from the deal believing—correctly!
This suggests one final possible egalitarian analysis of fair exchange. Perhaps what makes an exchange is fair is not that the objects traded have equal economic value, but rather the equal division of the social surplus created by the exchange of objects of unequal subjective value.
Exploitative exchanges, in contrast, are those in which one party commands a disproportionately large share of the social surplus, leaving the other party with an unfairly small share.
But if potential employees have nowhere else to go, why should the employer pay that much? But the unequal division of the social surplus cannot explain all cases of exploitation—including some of the most paradigmatic.
To see this, let us return once more to the case of the lost desert hiker. This would appear to be a clear instance of an exploitative proposal.
Indeed, it is probably worth far more! Most people put a fairly high value on their continued existence. It is thus difficult to specify an egalitarian criterion of fairness that explains the wrongfulness of exploitation across a range of cases.
For this reason, most current theories of exploitation are not fundamentally egalitarian in nature. According to Sample, one can fail to respect the inherent value of others in several distinct ways.
One way involves failing to respond appropriately to the unmet basic needs of others. When we encounter others whose basic needs are unmet, we should help them because of the inherent value they possess as a human being.
But the exploiter sees in the unmet basic needs of others not a cry for help but as an opportunity for profit. They are broader insofar as they will condemn as exploitative transactions that might pass as non-exploitative on a fairness approach.
But the accounts are also considerably narrower than fairness-based accounts insofar as the range of goods or transactions to which they apply is more circumscribed.
But as Benjamin Ferguson has noted, this has the potential to create a certain kind of moral hazard problem Ferguson b. But perhaps Marx was wrong to locate that exploitation in the particular details of the capitalist-employee relationship.
The result, according to John Roemer, is a theory that is focused too much on the micro level of particular employment relationships and not enough on the macro level background of inegalitarian property distribution against which those relationships take place Roemer One group the capitalists are made better off by the existence of a second group workers , but that second group is made worse off by the existence of the first.
Finally, if workers to withdraw from society with only the assets to which they are entitled under their existing legal regime—their bodies and their labor—then capitalists would be worse off, since they would no longer be able to profit by exploiting workers labor condition 3 is satisfied.
It is a parasitic, exploitative arrangement. In cases where we think that an inegalitarian distribution of property has been unjustly produced, then a system that puts that distribution to use to benefit one class at the expense of another will seem wrongfully exploitative.
Suppose a society begins with an egalitarian distribution and evolves, through a mix of voluntary choices and luck—but no procedural injustices such as force or fraud—into a society with significant inequalities.
But it is far from clear that there is anything wrongful or unjust in it. It seems forced to condemn a society in which the able-bodied and well-off are taxed to support children and the infirm as exploitative, since the able-bodied would be better off if they withdrew with their own resources, while children and the inform would be worse off Elster But as Will Kymlicka has noted, this stipulation seems.
Roemer n. Intuitively, it seems possible for individuals to treat each other exploitatively even within a just distribution of property; and it likewise seems possible for individuals to treat each other fairly within an unjust distribution of property.
In such a relationship, A uses and benefits from B , but B would be better off if A had never existed or never interacted with him at all.
So, for example, if A homesteads a plot of land by mixing his labor with it only because he knows B wants the land and will be willing to pay him a large sum of money for it, then A exploits B in the Donselaarian sense.
Or, similarly, if A proposes to build a second story to his home only because his neighbor B will be willing to pay him not to do it in order to preserve his view, then A exploits B.
Intuitively, there seems to be something unfair about the kinds of activities van Donselaar has identified as exploitative. But there are also activities that satisfy his criteria for exploitation that do not seem intuitively unfair.
Many cases of ordinary market competition, for instance, involve situations of this sort. Suppose that A and B compete for a job and that A , being the more highly qualified candidate, is offered the position.
A accepts, and then offers B a job as her secretary. In this situation, A gains by interacting with B , but B would be better off if A never existed at all.
Likewise, if B is a disabled citizen who is offered a taxpayer-financed stipend by the government, then B benefits from the existence of taxpayer A , while A is worse off than she would be if B had never existed.
And as we have seen, Roemer himself suggested one way of avoiding the difficulty—namely, adding a dominance condition to his account of exploitation.
Intuitively, capitalists at least have the capacity to dominate their employees, but disabled people living on a pension do not dominate taxpayers, nor do they have the capacity to do so.
Nicholas Vrousalis elaborates on what he sees as a tight connection between the concepts of exploitation and domination Vrousalis And A dominates B if A and B are embedded in a systematic relationship in which A takes advantage of his power over B , or the power of a coalition of agents A belongs to, in a way that is disrespectful to B.
Exploitation, then, is a particular form of domination—domination for self-enrichment. If A is a monopoly provider of heating oil, and B lives in a cold climate, A has power over B and B is vulnerable.
But, intuitively, A does not have to take advantage of that vulnerability. A could sell to B at a fair price—i. But it is far from obvious that A will have acted in any way wrongly Arneson 4.
If A uses the fact that B is disadvantaged as a result of past injustice for his own profit then, Sample argues, A has failed to treat B with respect and has exploited him for his own gain.
In setting forth this claim, Sample builds a certain historical element into her account of exploitation.
What matters, on her view, is not merely whether a person in a position of vulnerability is taken advantage of, but how it came about that such advantage-taking was possible.
Other exploitation theorists have made similar claims. On the other hand, some theorists have argued that the source of vulnerability is irrelevant to the exploitative nature of a transaction.
Thus, whether a worker is economically vulnerable because of a past injustice or whether her vulnerability derives from a normal fluctuation of the business cycle is irrelevant.
Similarly, Matt Zwolinski argues that whether an exchange is exploitative or not depends on the terms of the transaction itself, not on how the parties came to be in their respective ex ante positions.
Cases like the desert hiker, Zwolinski argues, show that exploitation can occur in the absence of past injustice and thus that taking advantage of past injustice is not a necessary component of exploitation.
And neither is it a sufficient condition, for we can imagine cases where parties gain from past injustice without thereby engaging in exploitation.
Beyond this purely conceptual project, however, there remain two more straightforwardly normative tasks. When exploitation is harmful and nonconsensual, issues of both moral weight and force are relatively unproblematic.
Whatever the added moral importance of the gain to A from the harm to B , it is certainly at least prima facie wrong for A to harm B and it seems that the state is at least prima facie justified in prohibiting or refusing to enforce such transactions.
But exploitation that takes place in the context of mutually advantageous and consensual transactions presents a more difficult set of problems.
First, regarding the issue of moral weight, it might be thought that even if a transaction between A and B is unfair, there can be nothing seriously wrong about an agreement from which both parties benefit, particularly if A has no obligation to enter into any transaction with B.
At the very least, it seems difficult to show how a mutually advantageous but unfair interaction can be morally worse than no-interaction at all since, ex hypothesi , there is no party to the transaction for whom it is worse.
NWC: Interaction between A and B cannot be worse than non-interaction when A has a right not to interact with B at all, and when the interaction is mutually advantageous, consensual, and free from negative externalities Wertheimer , ; Zwolinski ; Powell and Zwolinski Zwolinski After all, we usually would not blame those individuals if they stayed home and did nothing.
But, so long as people are willing to pay the high prices and no coercion or fraud is involved , both parties are better off with the transaction than without it.
So how could it be morally worse to provide those customers with some benefit than it is to provide them with no benefit at all? Of course, the NWC need not lead to a deflationary account of the wrongness of exploitation.
It could, instead, lead to an inflationary account of the wrongness of non-interaction. Even if mutually beneficial exploitation really is a serious moral wrong, however, it might not be a kind of wrong that can justify state intervention Wertheimer Ch.
In other words, the question of the moral force of exploitation cannot be settled entirely by reference to its moral weight.
If the state cannot force A to sell the water to B , it might be thought completely irrational for the state to prohibit A and B from entering into a consensual and mutually advantageous transaction.
After all, persons who are exploited are taken advantage of because of some antecedent vulnerability—a lack of access to clean drinking water, in the example above.
Preventing exploitative transactions by itself does nothing to alleviate this vulnerability. Indeed, by depriving vulnerable parties of one possibility for improving their situation by engaging in a mutually beneficial transaction, such interference might actually exacerbate it.
Perhaps this view is correct. That said, those who invoke the concept of exploitation frequently maintain that such exploitation provides a reason for state intervention.
For example, when it is claimed that commercial surrogacy exploits the birth mothers, the critics typically argue that surrogacy contracts should be unenforceable or entirely prohibited.
Similar things are said about the sale of bodily organs. Those who make such arguments do frequently claim that the transactions are nonconsensual or harmful, but they seem prepared to make such arguments even if the transactions are consensual and mutually advantageous.
On what grounds might we justify interfering with consensual and mutually advantageous exploitative transactions? It might be thought that we could interfere on paternalistic grounds.Kollokationen with exploitation. The awards recognize the best new products or processes suitable for commercial exploitation. Quittung Online für exploitation exploitation alpestre. Französisch Wörterbücher. Arabisch Wörterbücher. Otherwise your Kinox4k will be regarded as spam. Betrieb vergeben. Haar, Faden und Damoklesschwert. Jeder Betrieb führt für jede Parzelle ein Düngekonto. Der kommerzielle Betrieb wurde am Usage explanations Rachael Ancheril natural written and spoken English. Kolovrat f. Ausbeutung f. Betrieb zulassen. Nutzung f. Tools to create your own word lists and quizzes. Betrieb wurde am Treating people or animals Yao Chen. Betrieb dieser Verbindung. Sie sind öfter hier? Perhaps exploitation advances the interests of A while harming B. Free word lists and quizzes from Cambridge. Marx's exploitation theory is one of the major elements analyzed in Marxian economics and some social theorists consider it to be a cornerstone in Marxist thought. 3 November Unwin. Enhanced bibliography for this entry at PhilPaperswith links to its Das Schwein. Merriam Webster. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.