In this paper, I argue that pluralism about material constitution (i.e., holding that the relata of constitution can be non-identical) is a theoretically useful notion. First, I propose a principle whose denial is sufficient and, to my knowledge, necessary for pluralism to be true. Then I formulate three metaphysical antinomies (the problem of material constitution, the problem of change, and the problem of many) in such a way as to reveal that the previous principle is involved in all three. Then I show that the denial of the principle resolves all three of these problems. Finally, I conclude that pluralism is indeed theoretically useful on the basis of the following three points: 1) denying the mentioned principle is sufficient for pluralism to be correct, 2) denying the principle resolves three problems, and 3) by a theoretically useful notion I mean that if it were true it would solve multiple problems. / Master of Arts

No description available.

Made available in DSpace on 2014-12-17T14:27:19Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 JoseCDTS_DISSERT.pdf: 2389245 bytes, checksum: 8dd5cb96307ea8277eb987de871f5bdd (MD5) Previous issue date: 2012-06-15 / Brazilian law passes through a crisis of effectiveness commonly attributed to the extravagance of fundamental rights and public shortage. However, public finances are not dogmatically structured to solve the conflicts around the limitations of public spending. There are ethical conditioning factors, like morality, proportionality and impartiality, however, these principles act separately, while the problem of public shortage is holistic. Also, the subjectivity of politics discretionary in the definition of public spending, which is supported in an indeterminate concept of public interest, needs material orientation about the destination of public funds, making it vulnerable to ideological manipulation, resulting in real process of catching rights. Not even the judicial activism (such as influx of constitutionalism) is shown legally appropriate. The Reserve of Possible, also presents basic ethical failure. Understanding the formation of public shortage is therefore essential for understanding the crisis of effectiveness of state responsibilities, given the significant expansion of the state duty of protection, which does not find legal technique of defense of the established interests. The premise of argument, then, part of the possibility of deducting minimal model ethical of desire to spend (public interest) according to objective parameters of the normative system. Public spending has always been treated disdainfully by the Brazilian doctrine, according to the legal character accessory assigned to the monetary cost. Nonetheless, it is the meeting point between economics and law, or is in the marrow of the problem of public shortage. Expensive Subjects to modernity, as the effectiveness of fundamental rights, pass necessarily an ethical legal system of public spending. From the ethical principles deducted from the planning, only the democratic principle guides the public spending through the approval of public spending in the complex budget process. In other words, there is an ethical distancing of economic reality in relation to state responsibilities. From the dogmatic belief of insufficiency, public spending is evaluated ethically, according to the foundations of modern constitutionalism, in search of possible of the financial reserve, certain that the ethics of public economy is a sine qua non condition for legal ethics. / O direito brasileiro passa por uma crise de efetividade comumente atribu?da ? extravag?ncia de direitos fundamentais e ? escassez p?blica. Mas as finan?as p?blicas n?o est?o dogmaticamente estruturadas para solucionar os conflitos em torno das limita??es do disp?ndio p?blico. H? condicionamentos ?ticos, como a moralidade, a proporcionalidade e a impessoalidade, contudo esses princ?pios atuam isoladamente enquanto o problema da escassez p?blica ? hol?stico. Al?m disso, o subjetivismo da discricionariedade pol?tica na defini??o do gasto p?blico, amparado que ? no indeterminado conceito de interesse p?blico, carece de orienta??o material quanto ? destina??o da verba p?blica, tornando-o vulner?vel a manipula??es ideol?gicas, do que resulta um verdadeiro processo de captura de direitos. Nem mesmo o ativismo judicial (como influxo do constitucionalismo) se mostra juridicamente adequado. A Reserva do Poss?vel, igualmente, apresenta falha ?tica elementar. Entender a forma??o da escassez p?blica ?, portanto, primordial para a compreens?o da crise de efetividade dos deveres estatais, haja vista a crescente expans?o do dever estatal de tutela, o qual n?o encontra t?cnica jur?dica de defesa dos interesses consagrados. A premissa argumentativa, ent?o, parte da possibilidade de dedu??o de modelo m?nimo ?tico da vontade de despender (interesse p?blico) segundo par?metros objetivos do sistema normativo. A despesa p?blica sempre foi tratada com desd?m pela doutrina brasileira em fun??o do car?ter legal acess?rio atribu?do ao custo monet?rio. Nada obstante, ? o ponto de encontro entre Economia e Direito, ou seja, est? na medula do problema da escassez p?blica. Assuntos caros ? modernidade, como a efetividade dos direitos fundamentais, passam necessariamente por um sistema ?tico-jur?dico do disp?ndio p?blico. Dos princ?pios ?ticos deduzidos do ordenamento, apenas o princ?pio democr?tico orienta o disp?ndio p?blico, atrav?s da aprova??o da despesa p?blica em complexo processo or?ament?rio. Ou seja, h? um distanciamento ?tico da realidade econ?mica em rela??o aos deveres estatais. A partir da cren?a de insufici?ncia dogm?tica, a despesa p?blica ? sabatinada eticamente, segundo os fundamentos do Constitucionalismo Moderno, em busca do poss?vel da reserva financeira, certo de que a ?tica da economia p?blica ? condi??o sine qua non para a ?tica jur?dica