People with significant cognitive disabilities and others who advocate on their behalf routinely state their claims in terms of enabling people to claim their full citizenship. Informed by the results of a study by one of the authors, we draw attention to some of these claims, and discuss what a just society ought to do so that members with significant cognitive disabilities see themselves – and are seen by others – as full, and therefore equal, citizens. Several political philosophers have sought to develop disability-inclusive accounts of justice, using three strategies: (1) defend a permissive understanding of who is owed justice by rejecting contribution to social cooperation as a necessary condition; (2) defend a permissive understanding of what counts as contribution; and (3) argue that some demands of justice are owed to all, while others are owed only to cooperators. We defend a version of the second strategy, arguing that the relevant notion of contribution requires that it be something the agent chooses to do because they know it to be valued by someone else, and we argue that the third strategy also has a role to play.

有严重认知障碍的人和其他代表他们倡导的人通常会在使人们能够获得完整公民身份方面陈述他们的主张。根据其中一位作者的研究结果，我们提请注意其中一些主张，并讨论一个公正的社会应该做什么，以便有严重认知障碍的成员认为自己——并被其他人认为——是完整的，因此，公民是平等的。一些政治哲学家试图通过三种策略来发展包容残疾的正义解释：（1）通过拒绝将对社会合作的贡献作为必要条件来捍卫对谁应享有正义的宽容理解；(2) 捍卫对贡献的宽容理解；(3) 争辩说某些正义的要求是对所有人的，而其他人只欠合作者。我们捍卫第二种策略的一个版本，认为相关的贡献概念要求代理人选择做某事，因为他们知道其他人会重视它，我们认为第三种策略也可以发挥作用.