The human rights that are defended in libertarian literature tend to be limited in scope, which entails that the duties that people can be compelled to fulfil are similarly minimal. For this reason a commitment to libertarianism tends to be seen as incompatible with support for subsistence rights, enforceable positive duties, and redistributive taxation, since each one of these issues may require the infringement of libertarian property rights. In this thesis I aim to challenge these assumptions about libertarianism and to show that if a more plausible reading of libertarianism is adopted – what has come to be known as left-libertarianism – then this will generate a more substantial range of rights and correlative duties which are not only compatible with redistributive taxation, but in fact entail it. I show that libertarianism, despite its contention that human rights are exclusively negative, does not rule out subsistence rights provided that these are understood as negative rights, for example: a right not to be deprived of the means of subsistence, or deprived of a clean living environment. Negative rights can be violated not only by individuals or by institutions, but also by individuals supporting institutions. In order to respect the negative rights of others it is necessary to refrain from supporting or contributing to institutions that violate these rights. Moreover, failure to respect these rights brings about a positive duty of rectification, demonstrating the potential for positive libertarian duties even in the absence of positive rights. Since the manner in which rights can be violated is extensive, so is the scope of those individuals that owe rectification. The fundamental libertarian rights of self-ownership, which I characterise as three property rights – over the body, over the faculties (including talents, abilities and labour) and over what one can produce through exercising those faculties in conjunction with the body – demonstrate how we can come to have property rights over external objects, but self-ownership does not confer permanent private property rights over unlimited external worldly resources. In fact, a robust right of self-ownership is incompatible with the radically inegalitarian appropriation with which libertarianism is ordinarily associated. Given the equal rights of selfownership of every individual, it is far more plausible to conceive of the world as held in some egalitarian manner, rather than as unowned and available for appropriation in such a way that would disadvantage latecomers. I propose an egalitarian understanding of world ownership which comprises common ownership of land, and joint ownership of other external worldly resources such as oil and minerals. Taking the injustice of radically inegalitarian appropriation in conjunction with a duty to rectify past injustices, there follows a libertarian argument for redistribution, but crucially this redistributive taxation is collected not on income but on natural resource use. On a left-libertarian theory of rights, then, there is no right to appropriate unlimited resources, but there is a right to redistribution in the event of past injustices, including the misappropriation of worldly resources.

John Rawls was a political philosopher who proposed a theory centered around the idea of justice as fairness. His primary concern was social justice, so more specifically, he proposed a basic structure for society that ensures major social institutions like the government fairly distribute fundamental rights and duties and optimally divide advantages brought about by social cooperation. His theory is based on the idea that the correct principles to use for the basic structure of society are those that free and rational people would agree to in attempt to advance their own self-interest from a fair and equal starting position. Rawls proposes three principles that he believes people would agree to in this situation and describes what a society based on these principles would look like. Throughout this paper, I will attempt to explain Rawls’s “Theory of Justice” and defend various aspect of the theory against common objections.

No description available.

Without doubt, John Rawls's A Theory of Justice is one of the most important statements of Anglo-American political philosophy in the twentieth century. Through a revival of the social contract device, Rawls formulates a set of principles of correct political association ("the right") that he argues must be considered as prior to any conception of the good. These principles apply to all persons as free and equal beings in society, but more importantly they assume some things about the nature of persons in that society. On the institutional aspect of his theory, Rawls conceives of the state as a neutral arbiter of the good. This, coupled with a conception of persons as individuals that affirm the values of autonomy and equality, has drawn extensive critical fire from philosophers within and without liberalism. One such group of critics, the communitarians, claim that Rawls's idea of the person is too abstract or "groundless" to account for shared values, and thus fails to appreciate the extent to which we understand ourselves as embedded within our culture. Michael Sandel has thus argued that Rawls's person so conceived is too abstract to be of any theoretical let alone practical use, while Alasdair Macintyre has argued that such a conception of persons is incoherent: liberal "persons" do not know themselves, and so they cannot know what is right or what is good. This thesis analyzes the liberal-communitarian debate by comparing and contrasting some terms used by both sides in the debate. By analyzing the terms, I will present a liberal conception of the person as properly understood in Rawls's theory. ' Rawls has not been idle since the publication of A Theory of Justice. He has defended his theory in a series of articles and lectures that have developed his position in response to these and other criticisms. Specifically, by positing his theory within liberal-democratic culture, by acknowledging individual formative conceptions of the good, and by emphasizing and relying upon a modus vivendi view as the basis for political liberalism and a liberal culture, Rawls has answered the communitarian objections by incorporating and responding to those pertinent criticisms. I will argue that Rawls's recent emphasis on a theory of political liberalism successfully accounts for his idea of persons because it accords with our considered moral principles, it treats persons as free and equal beings worthy of respect, and it incorporates the only coherent construction of the social embeddedness thesis to a greater degree than communitarians acknowledge or appreciate. Rawls's political liberalism thus surpasses this aspect of the communitarian critique.

<p>The problem of world poverty is appalling in human terms. Almost half of all the humankind lives below the poverty line of $2 per day, whereas affluent parts of the world continue to enjoy enormous technological and economical progress. In the light of such discrepancy, the debate in political philosophy regarding “global justice” has renewed significance. The current debate between those who agree global justice is important, is those who think that positive duties towards poor is enough, and those who think that morality requires a re-designation of the ground rules operating at the global level.</p><p>The Cosmopolitan view grounds its theoretical framework in this second view. This study aims to analyse if, and how, the normative debate in the European Parliament reflects the assumptions, arguments and considerations of the Cosmopolitan approach. This study identifies central concepts of the Cosmopolitan approach, and then analyses how these concepts are discussed in the European Parliamentary debates. In addition, I identify who discusses what in the parliamentary debates. The analysis reveals how Cosmopolitan ideas are reflected in the discourse within the debates, and the second dimension identifies which party groups discuss and hold which key concepts of Cosmopolitanism.</p>

Liberty as well as equality has been the objective of the trend of liberalism ever since it commenced. More common sense exists with respect to the issue of liberty which guarantess and carries out liberalism¡Fnevertheless¡Mopinions differ on fulfilling the idea of equality, particularly the economic issue. In present times,the consequence of the insistence of willfully diminishing liberalism on the market brings about some social problems, such as the widening gap between the rich and the poor. This makes a part of advocates of liberalism, for example, John Rawls and Ronald Dworkin redeem economic justice and allocation, persisting in the fact that nations should take regulatory measures or promote social welfare system to implement the idea of looking after the minor groups thereafter. However, the perspective maintained by them incurs the criticism from the core scholars of liberalism like Friedrich A.Hayek and Rober Nozick that opine the perspective will be a far cry from the core concept of classical liberalism, which regards a nation is interference with the economic allocation policy as an invasion of personal freedom. While John Rawls is theory of justice principle constitutes, causing the dispute within the internal lines of contemporary liberalism, the theory, to be blunt, gives rise to a new trend of thought as regards the balance for which liberalism searches to protect personal freedom and facilitate social economic justice. In addition, liberalism cherishes individual freedom, emphasizes personal uniqueness as well as development, and pursues individual value and the conception of the good to embody respecting of personal thoughts. This genre of concept influences the stance a nation holds on the conception of the good, and thinks that personal value should be respected and not be meddled to embody neutral attitude of a nation. Rawls theory ¡]Theory of Justice¡^takes aim at justice to be the primary morality. Furthermore, priority is placed on ego or righteous independence that value or the conception of the good. He also hangs on to chase after the outlook of obligatory theory of the conception of the good under the frame constructed by justice. Yet, the theory of right priority, Atomism , neutral attitude towards a country, and value subjectivity that insisted by liberalism are all denounced by communitarianism who are of the opinion that the consequences of the Atomism in liberalism will lead to the loss of personal meaning, whereas the neutral attitude towards a country will contribute to problems, such as difficulties in building up social correctness to accomplish public interests. As to the criticism made by communitarianism, liberalism has the opportunity of reconsidering and scrutinizing its theory aside from making counter attacks, which generates a positive meaning for the development of theory of modern liberalism.

Magister Psychologiae - MPsych / Discussions about decolonisation of the curriculum resurfaced after the #FeesMustFall movement in South African universities. Despite its long history, there’s little to no change in its implication. Decolonisation is regaining popularity in academia; however little room is afforded to students to express their understanding of what the decolonisation of the curriculum entails. A gap within the literature was identified, which was the little consideration given to student voices.Thus, the primary aim of this research project was to explore students understanding of a decolonised Psychology curriculum in South Africa.

Avec 3,2 millions de voyageurs par jour, c'est pour SNCF Transilien l'équivalent en termes de flux d'un Airbus A380 décollant toutes les 6 secondes. Dans ces conditions extrêmes, une attention centrale est accordée à l'utilisateur au cœur du service. Notre thèse de doctorat s'inscrit dans ce cadre. Elle vise à modéliser et à fournir des solutions aux soins des utilisateurs en cas de détérioration de la production de transport ferroviaire. Notre contribution est de fournir un ensemble de recommandations concernant le processus d'optimisation afin d'atteindre un niveau de satisfaction des utilisateurs optimal compte tenu de l'instabilité de la production de service. À la suite d'une revue de la littérature, comprenant les spécificités des services, les concepts de recouvrement de service ainsi que des dimensions de perception et de satisfaction, nous mobilisons la théorie de la justice pour aborder la question de la gestion de la satisfaction de la clientèle en cas de défaillance. / With 3.2 million passengers per day, it is for SNCF Transilien the equivalent of an Airbus A380 taking off every 6 seconds. In these extreme conditions, a central attention is given to the user at the heart of the service, for breach of servuction. Our doctoral thesis fits in this framework. It aims to model and provide solutions to the care of users in case of deteriorated rail transport production. Our contribution is to provide a set of recommendations regarding the optimization process to achieve a level of satisfaction of users optimal given the instability of service production. Following a review of literature including the specificities of services, service recovery concepts as well as dimensions of perception and satisfaction, we will rely on theories of justice to give insights to the management of customer satisfaction.

O presente trabalho discute o liberalismo abrangente de Ronald Dworkin, como alternativa ao liberalismo político de John Rawls. Dworkin interpreta o liberalismo como uma teoria contínua entre ética e moralidade, ou seja, sem uma separação entre as doutrinas abrangentes e nossas concepções políticas para justificação dos fundamentos constitucionais, respeitando o pluralismo razoável presente na sociedade democrática. O liberalismo abrangente se apresenta como uma teoria liberal na qual a liberdade, a igualdade e a comunidade fazem parte de um único ideal político. / The present study discusses Ronald Dworkins comprehensive liberalism as an alternative to John Rawlspolitical liberalism. Dworkin construes liberalism as a continuous theory between ethics and morality, that is, without a separation between comprehensive doctrines and our political conceptions so as to justify constitutional grounds, thus respecting the reasonable pluralism existing in democratic society. Comprehensive liberalism presents itself as a liberal theory in which freedom, equality and community merge into a single political ideal.

A Justiça como Imparcialidade de Brian Barry propõe uma teoria de justiça imparcial como única solução legítima para uma sociedade encontrar princípios com os quais todos possam consentir. Essa concepção de justiça não pode impor aos indivíduos um comportamento de primeira-ordem. Ao contrário, deve se referir unicamente às instituições e estas devem acomodar as diversas concepções de Bem da sociedade. Se a sociedade for capaz de encontrar tais princípios, então será possível a vida em sociedade com tolerância mútua. Esta dissertação explora as razões de Barry para escolha dessa abordagem e aponta possíveis desafios não resolvidos por sua teoria. / Brian Barrys Justice as Impartiality conceives a theory of impartial justice as the only legitimated solution to a society who wants to find principles according to those everybody might consent. This theory should not impose a first-order behavior to individuals. Moreover, such concept of justice must be impartial in regard to individuals conceptions of good. This dissertation explores the reasons that led Barry to choose this approach, and suggests possible challenges unsolved by his theory.