This thesis reconstructs John Rawl's Original Position in order to show that within a liberal democratic culture, the institution of punishment ought to conform to the Moral Education Theory of Punishment, put forth by Jean Hampton. According to Hampton, punishment should facilitate a medium where the state educates the criminal on the moral implications of her wrongdoing. I argue that citizens would select the Moral Education Theory of Punishment in the Original Position, since it offers the best opportunity to redress two calamities related to the criminal's wrongdoing---namely, that it threatens the moral status of the victim, and that it results from the wrongdoer's deficient moral sensibility. Upon consideration, the representatives in the Original Position recognize that redressing either of the two calamities necessitates redressing the other; thus, both objectives reinforce one another. Consequently, the representatives would unanimously select the principles of punishment manifest in the Moral Education Theory.

In this thesis I compare the work of Ronald Dworkin and John Rawls within the context of the 'equality of what?' debate. I argue that the Rawlsian paradigm offers a much more flexible defence of a resourcist approach to egalitarianism than Dworkin's theoI)' of' equality of resources'. I argue that Dworkin's fundamental distinction between persons and circumstances is flawed because it involves commitment to a view of the person which belongs in the realm of' comprehensive moral doctrines', rather than in the realm of a political theory of justice. I also argue that an alternative distinction between choice and luck, expressed in the 'luck-neutralising aim' of egalitarianism, is inappropriate since it too involves transgressing political constraints on theories of justice. Rawls's utilisation of primary goods in his theory of justice is supported by considerations derived from the work of Thomas Scanlon. The schematic picture of relative urgency which Scanlon advances provides the rationale for the use of primary goods, and also allows us to discriminate . between compensation for handicaps and compensation for expensive tastes. Scanlon's schematic picture also frees the utilisation of primary goods from criticisms raised by Amartya Sen. Lastly, I discuss arguments advanced by Susan Hurley which enable an interpretation of Rawls's original position device which is independent of the luck-neutralising aim. Her arguments are extended as a criticism of Dworkin's hypothetical insurance market.

Made available in DSpace on 2014-06-11T19:25:25Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 Previous issue date: 2011-09-30Bitstream added on 2014-06-13T20:08:08Z : No. of bitstreams: 1 quintanilha_fr_me_mar.pdf: 319442 bytes, checksum: 549619955e9f9ae705f61d9cbf7bc06f (MD5) / Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES) / Ao abordarmos o tema justiça e democracia, o fazemos com base em John Rawls e Jürgen Habermas, filósofos que figuram de maneira expressiva no debate contemporâneo sobre o tal tema. John Rawls entende que o problema da democracia atual está na dificuldade de acordo sobre como as instituições básicas da sociedade devem ser organizadas para se atingir o respeito à liberdade e à igualdade de seus cidadãos, em outras palavras, como é possível conciliar a liberdade e a igualdade de pessoas morais a fim de que se satisfaça equitativamente a cultura pública existente na democracia a qual eles pertencem. Para tanto, Rawls apresenta uma teoria de justiça, pautada em princípios básicos que irão instituir uma sociedade bem-ordenada, possibilitando que se atinja um sistema de cooperação equitativa entre seus cidadãos. Habermas que, em sua acepção de justiça, também tenta solucionar em certa medida os mesmos problemas apresentados pelo sistema capitalista, compartilha das ideias apresentadas pela teoria rawlsiana no que concerne a seus resultados essenciais, mas não se abstém de tecer considerações críticas acerca de pontos fundamentais da teoria de justiça de Rawls. Nossa dissertação tem como objetivo, diante da análise da concepção política de justiça atual, delinear o debate entre ambos e expor as possíveis aporias decorrentes desse debate / In broaching the issue of justice and democracy, we draw upon John Rawls and Jürgen Habermas, philosophers appearing in an expressive way in the contemporary debate on these topics. John Rawls believes that the problem of democracy today lies in the difficulty in agreement on how the fundamental institutions of society should be organised in order to achieve respect for the freedom and equality of its citizens, in other words, how is it possible to reconcile the freedom and equality of moral people in order to equitably meet the existent public culture in the democracy to which they belong. Therefore, Rawls presents a theory of justice established on basic principles that will found a well-ordered society, thereby making it possible to achieve a system of equitable cooperation between its citizens. Habermas, who in his sense of justice also tries to resolve to some extent the same problems presented by the capitalist system, shares Rawls’s ideas when it comes to their essential results, but does not abstain from critical considerations about fundamental points of Rawls’s theory of justice. Through the analysis of the present political conception of justice, this dissertation aims at outlining the debate between both and expose the possible aporias arising from this discussion

Dissertação (mestrado)-Universidade de Brasília, Instituto de Ciências Humanas, Departamento de Filosofia, 2016. / Submitted by Camila Duarte (camiladias@bce.unb.br) on 2016-10-10T16:23:11Z No. of bitstreams: 1 2016_AlexandreMadrugadaCostaAraújo.pdf: 865456 bytes, checksum: ad171739a4acd3e0377ec863ff7ef625 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Patrícia Nunes da Silva(patricia@bce.unb.br) on 2017-01-02T20:40:04Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 2016_AlexandreMadrugadaCostaAraújo.pdf: 865456 bytes, checksum: ad171739a4acd3e0377ec863ff7ef625 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-01-02T20:40:04Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 2016_AlexandreMadrugadaCostaAraújo.pdf: 865456 bytes, checksum: ad171739a4acd3e0377ec863ff7ef625 (MD5) / Esta dissertação visa apresentar uma crítica e uma alternativa ao problema da negação da identidade pessoal levantado por Hume, a partir de alguns elementos presentes na Antropologia Filosófica de Henrique Vaz, especialmente centrada no conceito de pessoa. Trata-se do confronto de duas propostas bem distintas: a primeira de cunho empirista e cético, e, a segunda, ancorada em categorias metafísicas. _______________________________________________________________________________________ ABSTRACT / This dissertation aims to present a critique and an alternative to the problem of personal identity's negation raised by Hume, based on some elements present in Henrique Vaz's philosophical anthropology, which are specially focused on the concept of person. It is about the confrontation of two very different proposals: the first one, with a skeptical and empiricist hallmark and the second one, anchored in metaphysical categories.

Orientador: Marcos Lutz Muller / Dissertação (mestrado) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Instituto de Filosofia e Ciencias Humanas / Made available in DSpace on 2018-08-10T11:09:51Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Oliveira_JovinianoJoseRezendede_M.pdf: 1301687 bytes, checksum: 71602265165401b392f8c7abca689095 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2006 / Resumo: No século XX, na busca de argumentos racionais capazes de fornecer fundamentos legítimos para as principais instituições democráticas, filósofos e teóricos políticos se dedicaram à elaboração de concepções liberais de justiça. Nesse sentido, um dos esforços mais significativos foi o realizado por John Rawls (1921-2002), principalmente contido na obra Uma Teoria da Justiça (1971). A teoria de Rawls refletiu a necessidade das teorias liberais em responderem aos atuais problemas das sociedades capitalistas, principalmente às questões sobre o fundamento das obrigações políticas que se referem à legitimidade das instituições democráticas e à questão da estabilidade Nesta dissertação, não se pretende realizar uma análise puramente exegética ou comparativa das obras de Rawls, mas tratar de dois principais problemas que Rawls enfrentou em Uma Teoria da Justiça e que perpassaram todo seu projeto filosófico, ou seja, como seria possível haver consenso acerca de uma concepção de justiça para uma sociedade democrática constitucional? Os termos que constituem essa concepção conseguiriam contar com o apoio dos cidadãos? Para responder essas questões Rawls elaborou a concepção de justiça como eqüidade, um conjunto de princípios de justiça escolhido por pessoas racionais e razoáveis em uma situação inicial eqüitativa. Para Rawls, a concepção de justiça como eqüidade é estável porque ao aplicar-se às principais instituições sociais, tornariam a sociedade bem-ordenada. A atuação dos princípios de justiça nas instituições sociais geraria nos cidadãos um efetivo senso de justiça. Em Uma Teoria da Justiça, a estabilidade social é garantida pela presença desse efetivo senso de justiça, e em uma sociedade bem-ordenada os princípios de justiça garantiriam os direitos básicos para o exercício da cidadania democrática, e ainda assegurariam o auto-respeito dos indivíduos. Nesse contexto, agir conforme a justiça constitui um bem comum para as pessoas em geral. Em O Liberalismo Político (1993), Rawls revisa a sua concepção de justiça, e para dar maior realismo ao ideal de uma sociedade bem ordenada, pressupõe que essa sociedade seja marcada por uma pluralidade doutrinas morais e filosóficas abrangentes e razoáveis que são incompatíveis, mas justiça como eqüidade, por ser apresentada como uma concepção política de justiça capaz de alcançar um consenso por sobreposição entre diferentes doutrinas religiosas e filosóficas, seria capaz de solucionar a questão da estabilidade / Abstract: In the 20th century, in the search of rational arguments capable of giving legitimate fundaments to the main democratic institutions, philosophers and political theoreticians were dedicated to the elaboration of liberal conceptions of justice. In this meaning, one of the most significant efforts was made by John Rawls (1921-2002), mainly in his work A Theory of Justice (1971). Rawls' theory has reflected the necessity of liberal theories in response to the actual problems of capitalist societies, regarding matters of political obligations that refer to the legitimacy of democratic institutions and also matters of stability. In this thesis, there is no intention of a pure comparative analysis of Rawls'work, but to deal with two problems that Rawls has faced in A Theory of Justice and have overlapped his entire philosophical project, that means, how would it be possible to reach a consensus concerning a conception of justice to a constitutional democratic society? Could the terms that made this conception of justice count on the support of the citizens? To answer these questions Rawls has elaborated the conception of justice as fairness, a set of principles of justice, chosen by rational and reasonable people in an equitable situation. To Rawls, the conception of justice as fairness is stable, because applying it in the main social institutions would generate in the citizens an effective sense of justice. In A Theory of Justice, social stability is guaranteed by the presence of this effective sense of justice, and in a democratic society, the principles of justice would guarantee basic rights to the use of a democratic citizenship, and would also assure an individual self-respect. In this context, acting according the justice is a common well to people in general. In Political Liberalism (1993), Rawls revises his conception of justice, and to give more realism to the ideal of a well-ordered society, he considers that this society be characterized by a plurality of wide moral and philosophical doctrines that are incompatible, but justice as fairness, because it is presented as a political conception of justice capable of reaching a overlapping consensus between different religious and philosophical doctrines, would be capable of answering the matter of stability / Mestrado / Etica / Mestre em Filosofia

Orientador: Marcos Lutz Muller / Dissertação (mestrado) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Instituto de Filosofia e Ciencias Humanas / Made available in DSpace on 2018-07-28T07:40:22Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Welter_NelsiKistemasher_M.pdf: 10134975 bytes, checksum: 596c2c38f2063717dc62b364902fe9bd (MD5) Previous issue date: 2001 / Resumo: Dado o problema de escolha que se coloca na posição original, Rawls acredita que seus princípios de justiça sejam a melhor solução dentre uma lista de princípios possíveis de ser escolhidos. Procura demonstrar, portanto, que, dada a situação de insegurança em que se encontram as partes na posição original, elas buscam, como raciocínio central, a estratégia maximin de argumentação que leva à opção pelos dois princípios. O primeiro princípio defende que as liberdades básicas se apliquem a todos igualmente. Já a primeira parte do segundo princípio propõe a maximização das expectativas das pessoas menos beneficiadas, as que possuem menos expectativas de bens primários, enquanto que a segunda parte defende que a estrutura básica da sociedade deve estar disposta de tal forma a oportunizar aos que nasceram em posições sociais menos favorecidas a igualdade de oportunidades. Esses princípios compõem uma concepção de justiça que pode especificar uma base moral apropriada para instituições que fazem parte da sociedade democrática / Abstract: Not informed. / Mestrado / Mestre em Filosofia

Memoria (licenciado en ciencias jurídicas y sociales) / Este trabajo se divide en tres capítulos. En el primero de ellos se realiza una presentación general, introductoria aunque no elemental, de la teoría de la justicia de Rawls en su última versión, describiendo su marco general, dilucidando sus conceptos y elementos básicos claves (incluyendo a los principios de justicia). Asimismo, se esbozan las relaciones que existen entre los diferentes elementos de la justicia como equidad con el objeto de ofrecer una visión más sistemática e integrada, evitando así presentar la teoría de la justicia de Rawls como un conjunto de conceptos y partes aisladas entre sí. En el segundo capítulo se aborda y analiza la idea de igualdad en la teoría de la justicia de John Rawls y las maneras en que dicha noción se encuentra en varias partes de su teoría, atendido que la justa igualdad de oportunidades es una manifestación de tal idea. Considerando el objeto de este trabajo, se revisará especialmente cómo la idea de igualdad se manifiesta especialmente en la concepción normativa y política de la persona y en todos los principios de justicia que Rawls propone (“igualdad de la libertad”, “justa igualdad de oportunidades” y “principio de la diferencia”), las relaciones existentes entre ellos y la forma en que operan conjuntamente, especificando así los términos equitativos de la cooperación social, y en consecuencia sentando las bases de la “igualdad democrática”. Finalmente, en el capítulo III se analiza en extenso el principio de la “justa igualdad de oportunidades”: sus distintas formulaciones, sus interpretaciones, su ámbito de aplicación y, por último, sus implicaciones prácticas a nivel institucional. Se elabora, además y como ya se anticipó, una justificación que prima facie es independiente y distinta a la del argumento desde la posición originaria. En especial, se consideran las medidas o reformas políticas, jurídicas y económicas que son compatibles con dichos planteamientos, y el impacto que podrían tener en la sociedad chilena.

Philosophiae Doctor - PhD / A political arrangement is an arrangement for persons. Political arrangements are assessed in terms of the extent to which they manage the affairs of persons, which includes protecting their interests and entitlements. Political arrangements which are unable to protect the interests of its citizens, or a group of citizens, are deemed unacceptable, and where appropriate, alternative arrangements which do protect the interests and entitlements of its citizens are sought. In this thesis I argue that the political arrangement of John Rawls is unable to protect the interests and entitlements of the severely cognitively disabled who are regarded as full citizens by advanced political arrangements in the world today. I argue that it is the contract nature and conception of the person in Rawls’s system which excludes the severely cognitively disabled. This exclusion goes against our widely-held intuitions about the rights and entitlements of the severely cognitively disabled. I look to the Person Life View of Marya Schechtman, a conception of the person that includes the severely cognitively disabled, to see if a conception of the person that includes the severely cognitively disabled is able to solve the gap in Rawls’s system. I argue that it is not able to do so. I then propose a new way of approaching questions of personhood and appeal to the Aristotelian conception of the soul as the basis, arguing that membership of a type of organism typically considered a person is enough to be a complete member of that type and therefore a person.

In this thesis I argue that the tradition of political philosophy which follows in John Rawls's footsteps is obligated to concern itself not only with the realizability, but also with the realization, of justice. Although Rawls himself expresses a commitment only to the former of these, I argue that the roles which he assigns to political philosophy require him to take on the further commitment to realization. This is because these roles are meant to influence not only political philosophers, but the citizens of the wider community as well. The realistically utopian role, which I take to be the central one, requires political philosophy to inspire in that population a hope which I argue that realizability alone cannot provide. Given the deep revisions regarding the political nature of justice as fairness which Rawls made on the basis of realizability concerns, I argue that his theory must in this case be committed to a similar revision. The hope which political philosophy is meant to provide is simply not realizable until the discipline concerns itself centrally with the task of realization.

No description available.