According to Nussbaum, slavery does not involve objectification by inertness.

Question

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

The statement presented for evaluation is: 'According to Nussbaum, slavery does not involve objectification by inertness.'

Option under consideration: True. 
To assess this, recall Nussbaum’s framework on objectification, where she identifies several facets by which a person can be treated as an object rather than as a full human agent. One of these facets is inertness — treating someone as lacking agency, autonomy, or the ability to affect outcomes. 
If we apply this lens to slavery, the enslaved are typically deprived of autonomy, treated as property, and denied the capacity to act as persons with ends of their own. This aligns with the dimension of objectification by inertness, since the slave is made to seem passive, non-agentive, and fungible as a means to an end rather than an ends-in-themselves. 
Therefore, the claim that slavery does not involve objectification by inertness runs counter to Nussbaum’s analysis. It would, on the reading she offers, mischaracterize how slavery diminishes personhood by stripping away freedom, agency, and subjectivity, which corresponds to the concept of inert objectification.

Why this option is flawed: The rationale behind labeling this statement as 'true' rests on denying the inertness component, but Nussbaum explicitly treats denying autonomy and treating a person as an inert object (among other features) as a form of objectification. Critics might try to separate 'instrumental use' from 'inertness,' but Nussbaum’s framework shows that both can be present in slavery, and inertness is a recognized mode of dehumanization within objectification discourse. Accordingly, the assertion that slavery does not involve objectification by inertness is not consistent with her account.

Summary of the key idea: The inertness-related dimension is part of how slavery objectifies, so denying this connection mischaracterizes the nature of objectification in slavery as analyzed by Nussbaum.

PHI 007Y A01 WQ 2025 Final Exam

According to Nussbaum, slavery does not involve objectification by inertness.

View Explanation

Log in for full answers

Similar Questions

According to Nussbaum, instrumentality does not entail failing to have considerations or feelings for the objectified.

According to Nussbaum (discussing Marx), the objectification of workers in a capitalist society exhibits instrumentality.

'Complimentarity' is not one of Nussbaum's 7 types of objectification.

For Nussbaum, objectification is a necessary condition for an action to be morally wrong.

According to Nussbaum (discussing Marx), the objectification of workers in a capitalist society exhibits instrumentality.

According to Nussbaum, treating things as objects is sufficient for objectification.

According to Nussbaum, instrumentality does not entail failing to have considerations or feelings for the objectified.

For Nussbaum, objectification is a necessary condition for an action to be morally wrong.

More Practical Tools for Students Powered by AI Study Helper

Homework AI Solver

Stylized AI Paper Writer

Plagiarism Checker Assistant

Citation AI Academic Writing Tool

In-Class Translation Assistant

AI Note Generator

AI Quiz Answers

Past Exam Questions from University Test Bank

Smart Practice Assistant

Adaptive Practice

Making Your Study Simpler