Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of California, San Diego, 2007. / Title from first page of PDF file (viewed May 30, 2007). Available via ProQuest Digital Dissertations. Vita. Includes bibliographical references (p. 176-179).]

No description available.

O presente estudo tem por objeto lançar uma perspectiva teleológica sobre os direitos sociais, concebidos como expressão do bem comum, valor informador que conduz a interpretação desses direitos à real consecução de suas finalidades sociais. Tendo por meta a análise da estrutura funcional dos direitos sociais em comparação com a eminentemente distinta dos direitos de liberdade, são apresentados os conceitos de dignidade da pessoa humana e de bem comum como fundamentos ontológico e teleológico do Estado Democrático de Direito nacional. Fixadas essas premissas, parte-se para a análise da questão envolvendo a eficácia dos direitos sociais como direitos da democracia e do direito conciliados e em equilíbrio, exigindo, para sua concretização na realidade social, o respeito dos atores constitucionais pelos papéis que cada um desempenha na realização desses direitos. Neste ponto, é conferido especial destaque ao nível da deliberação política, em virtude de sua quase asfixia, pelo direito, na realidade brasileira contemporânea dos direitos sociais. Como questão atinente à eficácia, é questionada a subsunção dos direitos sociais à fórmula tradicional dos direitos subjetivos, por incompatível com sua própria natureza e estrutura funcional, desembocando na análise crítica da chamada “judicialização” dos direitos sociais, enfocando o papel do Judiciário nesta concretização. Partindo-se das premissas assim estabelecidas, lança-se um olhar em direção ao direito social à saúde, em particular à tormentosa questão envolvendo o fornecimento de medicamentos pelos entes públicos e à intervenção judicial nesta seara, propondo-se a fixação de alguns parâmetros racionais hábeis a disciplinar a difícil convivência entre a satisfação do auto-interesse e os critérios de justiça social e de bem comum que informam a dispensação de fármacos pela Administração. / The present paper aims at looking into the social rights through a teleological perspective, conceived as expression of common good, informative value that takes to the interpreting of such rights to the actual fulfillment of their social purposes. Comparing the analysis of the functional structure of the social rights with the eminently distinct of the freedom rights, the concepts of human dignity of the individual and the common good as being the ontological and teleological fundaments of the national Democratic Constitutional State. Once established those premises, we embrace the analysis of the issue regarding the efficacy of the social rights as rights of the democracy and of the law, both intertwined and in balance, thus demanding, in order to come true in the social reality, the respect of the constitutional players and of the roles they have in the fulfillment of these such rights. At this point, we highlight the level of the political deliberation, due to its near asphyxia, by the law, in the current Brazilian social rights scenario. Concerning efficacy, we question the subsuming of the social rights against the traditional formula of the subjective rights, for being incompatible with its own nature and functional structure, resulting in the critical analysis of the so-called “judicialization” of the social rights, focusing on the role of the Judiciary in such accomplishment. Starting with the established premises, we look into the social right to health, specially regarding the treacherous issue that deals with the supplying of medication by public institutions and the judicial intervention in this field, proposing the establishment of some rational parameters, which would discipline the difficult interaction between the satisfaction of self-interest and the criteria of social justice and common good that inform the distribution of pharmacological drugs by the Administration.

O presente estudo tem por objeto lançar uma perspectiva teleológica sobre os direitos sociais, concebidos como expressão do bem comum, valor informador que conduz a interpretação desses direitos à real consecução de suas finalidades sociais. Tendo por meta a análise da estrutura funcional dos direitos sociais em comparação com a eminentemente distinta dos direitos de liberdade, são apresentados os conceitos de dignidade da pessoa humana e de bem comum como fundamentos ontológico e teleológico do Estado Democrático de Direito nacional. Fixadas essas premissas, parte-se para a análise da questão envolvendo a eficácia dos direitos sociais como direitos da democracia e do direito conciliados e em equilíbrio, exigindo, para sua concretização na realidade social, o respeito dos atores constitucionais pelos papéis que cada um desempenha na realização desses direitos. Neste ponto, é conferido especial destaque ao nível da deliberação política, em virtude de sua quase asfixia, pelo direito, na realidade brasileira contemporânea dos direitos sociais. Como questão atinente à eficácia, é questionada a subsunção dos direitos sociais à fórmula tradicional dos direitos subjetivos, por incompatível com sua própria natureza e estrutura funcional, desembocando na análise crítica da chamada “judicialização” dos direitos sociais, enfocando o papel do Judiciário nesta concretização. Partindo-se das premissas assim estabelecidas, lança-se um olhar em direção ao direito social à saúde, em particular à tormentosa questão envolvendo o fornecimento de medicamentos pelos entes públicos e à intervenção judicial nesta seara, propondo-se a fixação de alguns parâmetros racionais hábeis a disciplinar a difícil convivência entre a satisfação do auto-interesse e os critérios de justiça social e de bem comum que informam a dispensação de fármacos pela Administração. / The present paper aims at looking into the social rights through a teleological perspective, conceived as expression of common good, informative value that takes to the interpreting of such rights to the actual fulfillment of their social purposes. Comparing the analysis of the functional structure of the social rights with the eminently distinct of the freedom rights, the concepts of human dignity of the individual and the common good as being the ontological and teleological fundaments of the national Democratic Constitutional State. Once established those premises, we embrace the analysis of the issue regarding the efficacy of the social rights as rights of the democracy and of the law, both intertwined and in balance, thus demanding, in order to come true in the social reality, the respect of the constitutional players and of the roles they have in the fulfillment of these such rights. At this point, we highlight the level of the political deliberation, due to its near asphyxia, by the law, in the current Brazilian social rights scenario. Concerning efficacy, we question the subsuming of the social rights against the traditional formula of the subjective rights, for being incompatible with its own nature and functional structure, resulting in the critical analysis of the so-called “judicialization” of the social rights, focusing on the role of the Judiciary in such accomplishment. Starting with the established premises, we look into the social right to health, specially regarding the treacherous issue that deals with the supplying of medication by public institutions and the judicial intervention in this field, proposing the establishment of some rational parameters, which would discipline the difficult interaction between the satisfaction of self-interest and the criteria of social justice and common good that inform the distribution of pharmacological drugs by the Administration.

Os conflitos e debates sobre usos, propriedade e gestão da água ganharam evidência nos processos de privatização de serviços de abastecimento nos anos 1990 e, atualmente, aparecem em outros espaços de luta social. Os distintos temas relacionados à água, no entanto, são usualmente trabalhados desarticuladamente, o que contribui para a disseminação de imprecisões teórico-conceituais que refletem as lutas sociais as concepções emergentes: o bem comum é um conceito vivo cujas imprecisões contribuem para sua cooptação pela hegemonia organizada por oligopólios que concentram as tecnologias de apropriação da água. Esse trabalho propõe uma análise dos diferentes temas da água a partir da articulação dos conceitos de metabolismo social, valor e luta de classes, em Marx; e das concepções emergentes nas lutas contra privações no acesso à água. Realiza, pela abstração, uma crítica ontológica da apropriação capitalista da água, que indica suas contradições e as esclarece desde sua gênese. A crítica ontológica é um movimento que mexe com todas as dimensões do conhecimento (epistemológicas, teóricas e metodológicas) e que reproduz o concreto, a sociedade capitalista em suas múltiplas determinações, pela abstração. Recria, dessa forma, essa realidade a partir de seu núcleo fundamental, o valor. As formas de apropriação da água na sociedade capitalista são organizadas pela produção de mais valor em uma dinâmica de luta de classes: a água é natureza incorporada na criação de mais valor. A análise do tema da água, nesse sentido, deve identificar os interesses de classe em disputa e os reflexos dessa disputa nos usos da água e nas formas de vida. Nessa perspectiva, se percebe que as formulações sobre a água como bem econômico, ao desconectar o valor-de-uso da água do valor atribuído pelo dinheiro, engendram uma relação fetichizada, na qual os mecanismos de gestão são separados das práticas de apropriação e integrados aos valores legitimados pelo capital. Ocultam, nesse processo, os aspectos desiguais e destrutivos das práticas de apropriação da água. O consenso ativo conquistado por essa hegemonia se manifesta na estratégia de ONGs, iniciativas políticas e análises acadêmicas enredadas em armadilhas teóricas e políticas, que aparece na confusão conceitual entre a água como bem público e bem comum. Inspirado em lutas sociais que alcançam a necessária crítica ontológica das relações capitalistas, defendo que uma concepção da água como bem comum está na afirmação éticoprática de que os frutos da natureza pertencem à humanidade. Pertencem, portanto, a todos os que deles necessitam para viver. O trabalho propõe, de forma conclusiva, uma compreensão universalizante da organização: a apropriação da natureza e da água é também a organização do metabolismo social que, na sociedade capitalista, se fundamenta na extração de mais valor pela classe capitalista em todos os momentos da vida. As concepções que emergem nas lutas sociais esboçam novas formas de organizar o metabolismo social, nas quais o critério para a apropriação da água e da natureza é o bem comum, um princípio ético e universal: a reprodução da vida humana. / Conflicts and debates surrounding water uses, properties and management became evident with the privatization processes in the nineties. Nowadays, these issues have appeared in further social struggles. Even though, the various issues related to water are usually approached in a non-articulated way, and that contributes to the dissemination of theoretical and conceptual imprecisions and contradictions, with consequences in social struggles that oppose capitalist appropriation of water and the concepts that emerge on it, like the common good. The common good is a living concept, but its theoretical and conceptual imprecisions contribute to its cooptation by a hegemonic bloc organized by transnational corporations which concentrate the technologies of water appropriation. This dissertation proposes an analysis of different issues related to water through the articulation of the concepts of social metabolism, value and class struggles in Marx; and conceptions that emerge in social struggles. It makes, through abstraction, an ontological critique of capitalist appropriation of water that indicates its contradictions and clarifies its genesis. The ontological critique moves every dimensions of knowledge (epistemological, theoretical and methodological) and reproduces the concrete, capitalist society in its multiple determinations. It recreates this reality through its fundamental nucleus, value. The different forms of water appropriation in a capitalist society are organized for the production of surplus value in a class struggle dynamic: water is nature incorporated in the creation of surplus value. The analysis of water issues, in this sense, must identify the class interests in dispute and also the reflection of this dispute in water uses and ways of life. In this perspective, it becomes evident that the formulations of water as an economic good, by disconnecting use-value from value attributed by money, engender a fetishized relation in which management mechanisms are separated from appropriation practices and integrated to values legitimated by capital. They conceal, in this process, unequal and destructive aspects of water appropriation. The active consensus conquered by this hegemony is manifested in the strategy of NGOs, political initiatives and academic analysis limited by concepts like governance and civil society as opposed to the State, and in the conceptual confusion between water as a public good and as a common good. Inspired in social struggles that reach the necessary ontological critique of capitalist relations, I argue that a conception of water as a common good is the ethical and practical affirmation that the gifts of nature belong to humanity: they belong to all who need it for living. This dissertation proposes, as a conclusion, a universalizing comprehension of organization: the appropriation of nature and water is also the organization of social metabolism which is founded, in capitalist society, in the extraction of surplus value by the capitalist class in every moment of life. Water as a common good is a conception that emerge in social struggles that aim at new ways of organizing social metabolism in which the criteria to appropriate water and nature is an ethical and universal principle: the reproduction of human life.

Os conflitos e debates sobre usos, propriedade e gestão da água ganharam evidência nos processos de privatização de serviços de abastecimento nos anos 1990 e, atualmente, aparecem em outros espaços de luta social. Os distintos temas relacionados à água, no entanto, são usualmente trabalhados desarticuladamente, o que contribui para a disseminação de imprecisões teórico-conceituais que refletem as lutas sociais as concepções emergentes: o bem comum é um conceito vivo cujas imprecisões contribuem para sua cooptação pela hegemonia organizada por oligopólios que concentram as tecnologias de apropriação da água. Esse trabalho propõe uma análise dos diferentes temas da água a partir da articulação dos conceitos de metabolismo social, valor e luta de classes, em Marx; e das concepções emergentes nas lutas contra privações no acesso à água. Realiza, pela abstração, uma crítica ontológica da apropriação capitalista da água, que indica suas contradições e as esclarece desde sua gênese. A crítica ontológica é um movimento que mexe com todas as dimensões do conhecimento (epistemológicas, teóricas e metodológicas) e que reproduz o concreto, a sociedade capitalista em suas múltiplas determinações, pela abstração. Recria, dessa forma, essa realidade a partir de seu núcleo fundamental, o valor. As formas de apropriação da água na sociedade capitalista são organizadas pela produção de mais valor em uma dinâmica de luta de classes: a água é natureza incorporada na criação de mais valor. A análise do tema da água, nesse sentido, deve identificar os interesses de classe em disputa e os reflexos dessa disputa nos usos da água e nas formas de vida. Nessa perspectiva, se percebe que as formulações sobre a água como bem econômico, ao desconectar o valor-de-uso da água do valor atribuído pelo dinheiro, engendram uma relação fetichizada, na qual os mecanismos de gestão são separados das práticas de apropriação e integrados aos valores legitimados pelo capital. Ocultam, nesse processo, os aspectos desiguais e destrutivos das práticas de apropriação da água. O consenso ativo conquistado por essa hegemonia se manifesta na estratégia de ONGs, iniciativas políticas e análises acadêmicas enredadas em armadilhas teóricas e políticas, que aparece na confusão conceitual entre a água como bem público e bem comum. Inspirado em lutas sociais que alcançam a necessária crítica ontológica das relações capitalistas, defendo que uma concepção da água como bem comum está na afirmação éticoprática de que os frutos da natureza pertencem à humanidade. Pertencem, portanto, a todos os que deles necessitam para viver. O trabalho propõe, de forma conclusiva, uma compreensão universalizante da organização: a apropriação da natureza e da água é também a organização do metabolismo social que, na sociedade capitalista, se fundamenta na extração de mais valor pela classe capitalista em todos os momentos da vida. As concepções que emergem nas lutas sociais esboçam novas formas de organizar o metabolismo social, nas quais o critério para a apropriação da água e da natureza é o bem comum, um princípio ético e universal: a reprodução da vida humana. / Conflicts and debates surrounding water uses, properties and management became evident with the privatization processes in the nineties. Nowadays, these issues have appeared in further social struggles. Even though, the various issues related to water are usually approached in a non-articulated way, and that contributes to the dissemination of theoretical and conceptual imprecisions and contradictions, with consequences in social struggles that oppose capitalist appropriation of water and the concepts that emerge on it, like the common good. The common good is a living concept, but its theoretical and conceptual imprecisions contribute to its cooptation by a hegemonic bloc organized by transnational corporations which concentrate the technologies of water appropriation. This dissertation proposes an analysis of different issues related to water through the articulation of the concepts of social metabolism, value and class struggles in Marx; and conceptions that emerge in social struggles. It makes, through abstraction, an ontological critique of capitalist appropriation of water that indicates its contradictions and clarifies its genesis. The ontological critique moves every dimensions of knowledge (epistemological, theoretical and methodological) and reproduces the concrete, capitalist society in its multiple determinations. It recreates this reality through its fundamental nucleus, value. The different forms of water appropriation in a capitalist society are organized for the production of surplus value in a class struggle dynamic: water is nature incorporated in the creation of surplus value. The analysis of water issues, in this sense, must identify the class interests in dispute and also the reflection of this dispute in water uses and ways of life. In this perspective, it becomes evident that the formulations of water as an economic good, by disconnecting use-value from value attributed by money, engender a fetishized relation in which management mechanisms are separated from appropriation practices and integrated to values legitimated by capital. They conceal, in this process, unequal and destructive aspects of water appropriation. The active consensus conquered by this hegemony is manifested in the strategy of NGOs, political initiatives and academic analysis limited by concepts like governance and civil society as opposed to the State, and in the conceptual confusion between water as a public good and as a common good. Inspired in social struggles that reach the necessary ontological critique of capitalist relations, I argue that a conception of water as a common good is the ethical and practical affirmation that the gifts of nature belong to humanity: they belong to all who need it for living. This dissertation proposes, as a conclusion, a universalizing comprehension of organization: the appropriation of nature and water is also the organization of social metabolism which is founded, in capitalist society, in the extraction of surplus value by the capitalist class in every moment of life. Water as a common good is a conception that emerge in social struggles that aim at new ways of organizing social metabolism in which the criteria to appropriate water and nature is an ethical and universal principle: the reproduction of human life.

Les notions de Bien commun et de citoyenneté ont été au centre des préoccupations des acteurs politiques comme des philosophes de la Rome antique. Elles constituent l’essence de toute République. Cette Thèse a comme objectif de montrer, à partir des œuvres de Cicéron, Salluste et Tite-Live, que la grandeur et la décadence de la République romaine sont intrinsèquement liées à la gestion du Bien commun. Notre démarche a donc été de remonter, avec nos auteurs, au passé de Rome, pour voir, à partir des valeurs qui ont fait la grandeur de la République, pourquoi ce déclin a pu s’amorcer. Le résultat auquel nous avons abouti a été de montrer que la principale cause de la décadence de la République romaine est la propension qu’ont eue les Romains, à partir de la fin de la Deuxième Guerre punique, à privilégier leurs intérêts et ambitions personnels au détriment de l’intérêt général. Ces faits nouveaux, selon nos auteurs, ont été rendus possibles par une crise sans précédent due à une ouverture démesurée de la citoyenneté qui rendit non opérationnelles des institutions prévues pour une cité. / The notions of common good and citizenship were at the centre of the preoccupations of political stakeholders as well as Ancient Rome philosophers. They constitute the essence of every Republic. Based on the works of Cicero, Sallust and Livy, this thesis aims at showing that the greatness and decline of the Roman Republic are intrinsically linked to common good management. Our approach was therefore to go back, with our authors, to the past of Rome, to see, from the values that have made the greatness of the Republic, how this decline happened. Our research made it possible to conclude that the main cause of the decline of the Roman Republic was the propensity of Romans, from the end of the Second Punic War, to privilege their personal interests and ambitions to the detriment of general interest. According to our authors, these new events were caused by an unprecedented crisis due to a disproportionate openness of Citizenship that had paralysed the institutions, initially planned for just a city like Rome.

Thesis advisor: Jeffrey Bloechl / According to Catholic social doctrine, there are two principles which serve as foundational pillars of social thought and action: the dignity of human being and the primacy of the common good. Each human person has unique and endless worth in the eye of God, since “God created each human person in His image, in the image of God he created humankind, male and female. He created them” (Genesis, 1: 27). God creates all things and wanted them to participate in His glory and happiness (well-being). Thus, by their nature, all human beings want to be happy. To reach happiness is “something final and self-sufficient and the end of our actions” (NE 1097b20), but we should not forget that by nature man is a part of the greater order. How can one defend both the dignity of the human person and the primacy of the common good? To defend the dignity of human person the first question must be answered what is meant a human person, since the ways in which we understand ourselves as persons have direct effects on the ways in which we organize ourselves collectively in the political communities. To answer what is a human person we will understand how Maritain makes the distinction between individual and person, and what it is that constitutes a human person. It leads to understand the whole human being, soul and body, is a person. Man is as a part of the greater order. According to Aristotle and followed by Aquinas, every creature is only a part of the whole perfection of the universe, just as one instrument in an orchestra is a part of the whole perfection of the harmony. “Society is a whole composed of persons is to say that society is a whole composed of wholes” (Evans and Ward, The Social and Political Philosophy of Jacques Maritain, p. 85). Because the relationship between the common good and the dignity of the human person is the relationship of our dignity of finality and our dignity of nature. We distinguish between the human acts and the acts of human being in order to understand the notion of Aquinas’s the human act. Then, we will understand why Maritain defends natural law as an antidote for a secular society and present crisis of pluralist society. According to Maritain, the deepest result of the crisis from the modern to the present time is man’s natural community in the natural law and his innate ordination to the transcendent as the source of ultimate value have been casted into doubt. Thus, the only appropriate way to reconcile the common good and my good is to turn God into my private good as a kind of a good infinitely shareable, as if there were commensurability between my finite and infinite goodness. To make this reconciliation into the present age, “you must love your neighbor as, like yourselves,” ordered to a common good. / Thesis (PhD) — Boston College, 2022. / Submitted to: Boston College. Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. / Discipline: Philosophy.

Yes / In human societies there will always be differences of views and interests. But the reality today is that we are all interdependent and have to coexist on this small planet. Therefore, the only sensible and intelligent way of resolving differences and clashes of interests, whether between individuals or nations, is through dialogue. The promotion of a culture of dialogue and nonviolence for the future of mankind is thus an important task of the international community. (His Holiness the Dalai Lama, in a speech to the “Forum 2000″ Conference, Prague, Czech Republic, September 4, 1997)

Yes / The purpose of a systematization is threefold. It is first and foremost a tool for self reflection and critical analysis by participants of a process. Secondly, it enables participants to adjust and plan better for the future, learning from past mistakes and problems. And finally, it informs non-participants and hopefully encourages them to get involved. Lisa Cumming has worked with these goals in mind to produce this systematization of a six year experiment in how a University can share concerns and pool skills with local communities to help build a better place for working and living. She has been assisted by many people who have come in and out of the PPC as their time and inclination permits over the years. In the appendix we have only listed the members of our steering and now advisory committees. Many others have nurtured this process on its way and created lively and sometimes tense debates about the role of the PPC. We thank them all for their contributions. Readers will note that this systematization is open and self critical. The PPC did not set out to solve the problems of Bradford District. Participants in our network do not have a ‘solution’ to take off the shelf for addressing the complex issues facing the communities of the District. These include the legacy of economic change and decline and the differential impact on the South Asian communities who came to work in the factories that have closed down, as well as problems in housing, education and employment. PPC participants see value in the partnerships to be forged through the network and the discussion of difficult topics. Above all the PPC is a commitment to building a way of talking about the divisions and differences within and between our communities, largely a legacy of our social and economic past, as a first step to finding shared solutions for the future. On the journey, we have had many difficult moments as PPC network participants have debated and reflected on ways forward. Our systematization has tried to convey the ups and downs of this journey. We have learnt how quickly trust erodes where there is little clear leadership from the local state. We have also learnt that lack of trust makes it very difficult to challenge and open debate. Our idea of ‘safe spaces’ has been taken up in the District by others. But we are very aware that Bradford people are still not comfortable in talking about issues such as ethnicity, religion, gender, diversity, inequality and racism in ways which could encourage the search for shared understandings and an end to all discrimination and oppressions. It is for this reason that Bradford District’s idea of building a ‘Shared Future’ will require, we think, much more effort to open up ways of exploring these issues which go deep into our individual lived experiences as well as that in our groups and collectivities. One of our tasks for the future, therefore, is to deepen this effort and the challenges it implies. We all need to confront and examine our assumptions towards each other and to acknowledge the legacy of social inequality, racism and gender discrimination on people’s sense of self worth. We need to recognize the power relationships amongst us all, and how we can be powerless in one relationship and use our power to dominate in other relationships. There are complex intellectual problems to be addressed, such as the unresolved debate around multiculturalism, cohesion, integration and interaction. The PPC is just one space in our District for this debate to take place. The debate is not in itself the solution to the material problems facing our many poor communities. But opening it is one way of democratizing the search for such solutions and ensuring that as many voices as possible participate in finding them.