Thesis (M.A.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1971. / eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references.

Memoria (licenciado en ciencias jurídicas y sociales) / De la investigación pasada y actual relativa a la formación filosófica de Bello, en especial de las influencias que recibe de diversos pensadores que juegan un papel preponderante en la constitución de su material ideológico a partir del cual elaborará su proyecto filosófico más importante, su Filosofía del Entendimiento, esta tesis pretende justificar que en dicho planteamiento filosófico ocupa un lugar relevante la influencia empirista. Dicha posición – la empírica - se caracteriza por su afán de establecer verdades basadas en consideraciones fácticas y sostener que todos los contenidos de conciencia proceden de la experiencia sensible, principios que pensamos, están explícitamente presentes, con algunas variaciones originadas según el sello particular de Bello, a lo largo de las diversas y abundantes expresiones de su legado intelectual, que tanta importancia han tenido en el desarrollo histórico de nuestro país, transformándose en sólido vínculo filosófico que subyace en las diversas materias a la que nuestro pensador se dedico, y que de diversas maneras está presente en los fundamentos de su concepción acerca del Derecho.

Classics and Modern European Languages / M.A. (Classics)

Zugl.: Tübingen, Univ., Diss., 2005

Quels rapports entretiennent le jus contra bellum et le jus in bello ? S’agit-il de deux corps de règles indépendants? Ou sont-ils au contraire influencés l’un par l’autre, comme certaines théories le professent de manière récurrente ? Dans la présente thèse, nous avons tenté de répondre à cette question et de clarifier certains aspects fondamentaux des relations entre ces deux corps de règles. Dans la première partie, nous avons procédé à l’étude du principe de l’égalité des belligérants. Ce principe constitue la pierre angulaire de l’application des règles du DIH et proscrit toute invocation du jus contra bellum pour influencer l’application du jus in bello. Cela n’est pas évidemment sans poser de problèmes dans un ordre juridique dont une des règles fondamentales interdit le recours à la force. Ainsi, le principe de l’égalité des belligérants a fait l’objet de théories visant à remettre en cause son caractère absolu. Notre étude a montré qu’il n’en était rien. Le principe de l’égalité des belligérants est de nature coutumière et ne souffre pas d’exception. Ainsi, il incarne, dans sa forme la plus absolue, l’indépendance qui existe entre le jus contra bellum et le jus in bello. La seconde partie de notre étude a eu pour objet de vérifier si cette indépendance pouvait également caractériser d’autres aspects des relations entre ces deux corps de règles, ou si on contraire, l’étanchéité entre ces deux branches du droit international n’était pas absolue. Ont été analysés, d’une part, les champs d’application ratione materiae et personae de ces corps de règles et, d’autre part, deux notions de fond qui sont considérées comme formant des « ponts » entre le jus contra bellum et le jus in bello : la nécessité et la proportionnalité. Ici encore, notre analyse confirme que l’indépendance constitue la caractéristique principale des relations entre le jus contra bellum et le jus in bello.

Modern warfare in general, and targeted killing (TK) in particular, challenge conventional legal paradigms. While some contend that targeted killing is a clear violation of law, others argue that it is the law that should adapt to its modern context. In this thesis, I argue in favor of the latter. I will first explain the two dominant paradigms through which one can interpret TK: law enforcement versus armed conflict, going on to argue that an armed conflict paradigm can be legitimately invoked. In sections IV and V, I examine the rights and status of targeted individuals in modern conflict. I will then explore Jeremy Waldron’s objection to TK—that its potential for abuse outweighs its utility. I conclude by arguing that TK, like all warfare, is justified only by the unacceptability of its alternative, and that the justification of all warfare abides under the same pragmatic presumption.

No description available.

JORDÃO, Marco Aurélio de Medeiros. A guerra justa no liberalismo político de John Rawls. 2008. 97f. – Dissertação (Mestrado) – Universidade Federal do Ceará, Programa de Pós-graduação em Linguística, Fortaleza (CE), 2008. / Submitted by Gustavo Daher (gdaherufc@hotmail.com) on 2017-10-02T16:05:24Z No. of bitstreams: 1 2008_dis_mamjordao.pdf: 548126 bytes, checksum: 22ae5d3c543b79e0505bea3a2c50c387 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Márcia Araújo (marcia_m_bezerra@yahoo.com.br) on 2017-10-04T15:42:28Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 2008_dis_mamjordao.pdf: 548126 bytes, checksum: 22ae5d3c543b79e0505bea3a2c50c387 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-10-04T15:42:28Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 2008_dis_mamjordao.pdf: 548126 bytes, checksum: 22ae5d3c543b79e0505bea3a2c50c387 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2008 / This work intends to study the concept of just war from an analysis of the political international philosophy of the American philosopher John Rawls. We will take like base the work Law of People (2001), and will retake some basic concepts of too many works, in special A Theory of the Justice (1971) and Political Liberalism (1993). Our objective in this dissertation is to examine two questions: I) How the principle of justice of the international right of Rawls, justify a military intervention? II) Are there cases in which to do a war it is morally legitimize? Our star point is from the general concept of war and will present the thought of four authors paradigmatic what boarded this subject, and they are: Voltaire and his humane vision of bases Illuminists; Kant and his project of perpetual peace; Clausewitz and the war as exceptional case of the politics; Carl Schmitt and the concept of political and binomial friend – enemy. The concepts what we will board in Rawls are: a)the concept of political liberalism and the idea of pluralism and tolerance what they are harnessed to him; b) The conception of traditional liberalism and the difference of his political liberalism; c) The idea of original position, essential notion to understand why the war is just when is only made of “society of the people”. Finally, we will investigate the questions from the recovering that Rawls does from the concept of Jus ad Bellum, what in an immediate translation is it Justice of the war, and therefore, answers which motives of going away to war. And Jus in Bello, whose translation would be a justice in waging war, in other words, which moral behaviour what the soldier must adopt in struggle. / Esse trabalho tem como objetivo estudar o conceito de guerra justa, a partir de uma análise da filosofia política internacional do filósofo americano John Rawls. Tomaremos como base à obra Direito dos Povos (2001), e retomaremos alguns conceitos básicos das demais obras, em especial Uma Teoria da Justiça (1971) e Liberalismo Político (1993). O nosso objetivo nessa dissertação é examinar duas questões, a saber: I) Segundo os princípios de justiça do direito internacional de Rawls, se pode justificar uma intervenção militar? II) Existem casos em que fazer uma guerra é moralmente legitimo? Partiremos do conceito geral de guerra e apresentaremos o pensamento de quatro autores paradigmáticos que abordaram esse tema, são eles: Voltaire e sua visão humanitária de bases Iluministas; Kant e seu projeto de paz perpétua; Clausewitz e a guerra como caso excepcional da política; e Carl Schmitt e o conceito do político e o binômio amigo – inimigo. Os conceitos que abordaremos em Rawls são: a) o de liberalismo político e a idéia de pluralismo e tolerância a eles atrelados; b) A concepção de liberalismo abrangente e o porque esse se diferencia do seu liberalismo político; c) A idéia de posição original, noção essencial para entender como se dará à sociedade dos povos e por que a guerra só é justa quando travada por essa sociedade específica. Finalmente, investigaremos essas perguntas a partir da retomada que Rawls faz de dois conceitos, a saber, Jus ad Bellum, isto é, justiça do guerrear, e do Jus in Bello, que em uma tradução imediata significa justiça no guerrear, ou seja, qual o comportamento moral que o soldado deve adotar em luta.

Classics and Modern European Languages / M.A. (Classics)

No description available.