I explore the problem of using primary goods as the index for determining the least-advantaged members in a society in Rawls’s theory of justice. I look at the problems presented to Rawls by Amartya Sen and his capabilities approach. I discuss the solutions to Sen’s problems given by Norman Daniels, who argues that primary goods are able to take capabilities into account. Finally, I supplement Daniels, arguing that the parameters Rawls uses to define his theory limit Sen’s objection and that primary goods are the appropriate metric of justice in Rawls’s theory.

Virtue is the way to conduct oneself and is the develop guidance and the behavioral principle that lead the people of the past, present, and future to fulfill morals. Decency, well-being, and happiness are the ultimate goals that people seek and are the standards for people to discuss and define behaviors. Therefore, the reason that the becoming of moral people through fulfilling decency is that decency is itself the truth and the highest value among all existences. Decency itself is the concept for all concepts described by Plato, and is spiritual in the rational world. Mankind should avoid being blinded by physical or material values when pursuing values, and should position such pursuing within the spiritual life and metal happiness. Aristotle, however, believes that while a natural person transforms to a moral person, individual¡¦s utmost decency should be dominated by group¡¦s utmost decency. After modern liberalism has prevailed, Hobbes sees human ethics are based on jungle justice, and the evil among interpersonal relationship requires organizing a strong and powerful society to protect oneself and development. Organizing of such society shall break the traditional ethics to establish modern ethics. Despite Locke sees ethics and decency are social customs and compliance of laws, but social customs and laws are not the base, which should be interests and natural rights because interests and natural rights are the foundation, on which the developments of social customs and laws are based. These fundamental base for moral principles is established under free will, and because of mankind¡¦s freedom, ethical behaviors, social responsibilities, and public welfare are developed. Kant, however, believes that virtue comes from primarily good will and sets its position on utmost decency and all values are under utmost decency. Moral principles are, on the other side, unparalleled order, which is absolute, pervasive, and unconditional. Constant says that despite there is difference between freedom of the people of the past and the freedom of the people of present time, but the freedom of the people of the past may not be denied entirely or yearned for because the era now is an open society. Freedom of the past and freedom of present time are equally important. Miller believes that there is not just quantitative difference in happiness, but also qualitative difference. That is, spiritual happiness if far beyond physical happiness. Spiritual happiness is difficult to satisfy and physical happiness is easier to satisfy. Therefore, people who seek for spiritual happiness have stronger pride and do not wish for perish. Hayek says social order is a self-initiated and volunteer order, rather than constructed organized order. Therefore, every person should obey rules for common and righteous behaviors. Such system rules are formed naturally while people interact with each other. Rawls sees justice as the priority decency for social system and is the guiding principle for a society. If ethic does not match with truth, then it must be abandoned or revised. Principles of justice must be constructed from pure procedural justice. Thus it can be seen that the moral and decency of the philosophers listed herein can be concluded that there will be no moral if there is no freedom.

No abstract available. / Thesis (M.A.)-University of Natal, Durban, 2002.

Thesis (Ph. D. in Religion)--Vanderbilt University, Dec. 2009. / Title from title screen. Includes bibliographical references.

In Law of Peoples Rawls tries to work out a theory that will ensure a fair interaction between the world’s ‘peoples’ (synonymous with “nations”). By this he means a description of international rules that both liberal and non-liberal peoples can accept, with the purpose of eradicating political injustices in the world; which Rawls believes is the big cause of the greatest evils in the world. Furthermore, in his theory, Rawls envisions a set of international institutions (WTO, World Bank and “the UN”) that will work as the basic structure for implementing this scheme of law; global rules of trade; providing loans; facilitation of capital investment, etc. However, the theory lacks a description of which political liberties the peoples would want to secure, within the international institutions, and of what principles of distribution they should be assigned. Accordingly, I will in this essay try to establish which rights the peoples—as Rawls envisions them—would want to secure, and why they would want to be viewed as equal to everybody else, by reasons of the institutions profound and pervasive effect on peoples success. Furthermore, I will contend that this equality in political liberties, and especially the ‘principle of equal participation’, will be impaired by the inequalities in resources that Rawls accepts between the peoples. Consequently, an issue of how wealthier peoples will use their power to promote their self-interest, and the lack of belief that constitutional safeguards, within the international institutions, will constrain them from using means of agitation.

Esta dissertação tem por objetivo verificar se a teoria da justiça desenvolvida por John Finnis na obra “Natural Law and Natural Rigts” está em consonância com a tradição aristotélicotomista. Para tanto, primeiro é desenvolvida a teoria da justiça apresentada por Aristóteles na obra “Ética a Nicômaco”, na qual Aristóteles faz a divisão da justiça em duas partes: justiça legal e justiça particular e, depois, subdivide esta última espécie em justiça distributiva e justiça corretiva. Após é apresentada a teoria da justiça de Tomás de Aquino, extraída das obras “Suma Teológica” e “Comentários à Ética a Nicômaco de Aristóteles”. Para a análise das duas teorias, o trabalho observou a estrutura do conceito de justiça social identificada pelo professor doutor Luis Fernando Barzotto no artigo “Justiça Social – Gênese, Estrutura e Aplicação de um Conceito”. Assim, são especificadas as partes componentes do conceito: a relação regulada pela justiça; a identificação do bem a ser alcançado pela justiça; a atividade, ação humana que é realizada; o sujeito beneficiado na relação de justiça; o dever oriundo dessa relação; sua adequação, formulação e fundamentação ética. A segunda parte do trabalho apresenta a teoria da justiça de John Finnis, ressaltando a importância do conceito de razoabilidade prática em sua exposição. São identificados os elementos da justiça, a importância do conteúdo do bem comum em sua análise, bem como a sua divisão da justiça. Por fim, é feita uma breve exposição sobre o que Finnis disse na obra “Aquinas”, em que o referido autor, analisando a obra de Tomás de Aquino, faz suas conclusões a respeito da justiça na ótica do filósofo medieval. Questões às quais Finnis entende como relevantes para serem analisadas sob a luz da justiça são discutidas. / This dissertation tries to answer the question of knowing whether the theory of justice developed by John Finnis in his work “Natural Law and Natural Rights” is in accordance with the Aristotelic-Thomist tradition. For the consecution of this objective, the theory of justice presented by Aristotle in his work “Ethics to Nicomacus” is first developed. Aristotle divides justice in a twofold view: legal justice and private justice and then, he subdivides the latter in distributive justice and corrective justice. Thomas of Aquinas’ theory of justice is then presented, taken from the works “Suma Theology” and “Comments to Aristotle’s Ethics to Nicomacus”. For the analysis of theories, this work followed the structure of the concept of social justice identified by the Prof. Dr. Luis Fernando Barzotto in the article “Justiça Social – Gênese, Estrutura e Aplicação de um Conceito” (“Social Justice – Genesis, Structure and Implementation”). So then, the parts of the concept are specified: the relation regulated by justice; the identification of the wealth to be reached by justice; the activity, performed human action; the benefited subject in the relation of justice; the duty resulted from this relation; its adequateness, formulation and ethic theoretical support. The second part of the work presents John Finnis’s theory of justice, highlighting the importance of the practice reasonableness concept in his exposition. The elements of justice, the importance of the common wealth content in his analysis, as well as his division of justice are identified here. At last, a brief exposition about what Finnis said in the work “Aquinas” is made, where the author, analyzing the works of Thomas of Aquinas, draws conclusions about the justice through the eyes of the medieval philosopher. The questions Finnis understands as relevant for being analyzed through the scope of justice are discussed here.

Esta dissertação tem por objetivo verificar se a teoria da justiça desenvolvida por John Finnis na obra “Natural Law and Natural Rigts” está em consonância com a tradição aristotélicotomista. Para tanto, primeiro é desenvolvida a teoria da justiça apresentada por Aristóteles na obra “Ética a Nicômaco”, na qual Aristóteles faz a divisão da justiça em duas partes: justiça legal e justiça particular e, depois, subdivide esta última espécie em justiça distributiva e justiça corretiva. Após é apresentada a teoria da justiça de Tomás de Aquino, extraída das obras “Suma Teológica” e “Comentários à Ética a Nicômaco de Aristóteles”. Para a análise das duas teorias, o trabalho observou a estrutura do conceito de justiça social identificada pelo professor doutor Luis Fernando Barzotto no artigo “Justiça Social – Gênese, Estrutura e Aplicação de um Conceito”. Assim, são especificadas as partes componentes do conceito: a relação regulada pela justiça; a identificação do bem a ser alcançado pela justiça; a atividade, ação humana que é realizada; o sujeito beneficiado na relação de justiça; o dever oriundo dessa relação; sua adequação, formulação e fundamentação ética. A segunda parte do trabalho apresenta a teoria da justiça de John Finnis, ressaltando a importância do conceito de razoabilidade prática em sua exposição. São identificados os elementos da justiça, a importância do conteúdo do bem comum em sua análise, bem como a sua divisão da justiça. Por fim, é feita uma breve exposição sobre o que Finnis disse na obra “Aquinas”, em que o referido autor, analisando a obra de Tomás de Aquino, faz suas conclusões a respeito da justiça na ótica do filósofo medieval. Questões às quais Finnis entende como relevantes para serem analisadas sob a luz da justiça são discutidas. / This dissertation tries to answer the question of knowing whether the theory of justice developed by John Finnis in his work “Natural Law and Natural Rights” is in accordance with the Aristotelic-Thomist tradition. For the consecution of this objective, the theory of justice presented by Aristotle in his work “Ethics to Nicomacus” is first developed. Aristotle divides justice in a twofold view: legal justice and private justice and then, he subdivides the latter in distributive justice and corrective justice. Thomas of Aquinas’ theory of justice is then presented, taken from the works “Suma Theology” and “Comments to Aristotle’s Ethics to Nicomacus”. For the analysis of theories, this work followed the structure of the concept of social justice identified by the Prof. Dr. Luis Fernando Barzotto in the article “Justiça Social – Gênese, Estrutura e Aplicação de um Conceito” (“Social Justice – Genesis, Structure and Implementation”). So then, the parts of the concept are specified: the relation regulated by justice; the identification of the wealth to be reached by justice; the activity, performed human action; the benefited subject in the relation of justice; the duty resulted from this relation; its adequateness, formulation and ethic theoretical support. The second part of the work presents John Finnis’s theory of justice, highlighting the importance of the practice reasonableness concept in his exposition. The elements of justice, the importance of the common wealth content in his analysis, as well as his division of justice are identified here. At last, a brief exposition about what Finnis said in the work “Aquinas” is made, where the author, analyzing the works of Thomas of Aquinas, draws conclusions about the justice through the eyes of the medieval philosopher. The questions Finnis understands as relevant for being analyzed through the scope of justice are discussed here.

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.

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.

Esta dissertação tem por objetivo verificar se a teoria da justiça desenvolvida por John Finnis na obra “Natural Law and Natural Rigts” está em consonância com a tradição aristotélicotomista. Para tanto, primeiro é desenvolvida a teoria da justiça apresentada por Aristóteles na obra “Ética a Nicômaco”, na qual Aristóteles faz a divisão da justiça em duas partes: justiça legal e justiça particular e, depois, subdivide esta última espécie em justiça distributiva e justiça corretiva. Após é apresentada a teoria da justiça de Tomás de Aquino, extraída das obras “Suma Teológica” e “Comentários à Ética a Nicômaco de Aristóteles”. Para a análise das duas teorias, o trabalho observou a estrutura do conceito de justiça social identificada pelo professor doutor Luis Fernando Barzotto no artigo “Justiça Social – Gênese, Estrutura e Aplicação de um Conceito”. Assim, são especificadas as partes componentes do conceito: a relação regulada pela justiça; a identificação do bem a ser alcançado pela justiça; a atividade, ação humana que é realizada; o sujeito beneficiado na relação de justiça; o dever oriundo dessa relação; sua adequação, formulação e fundamentação ética. A segunda parte do trabalho apresenta a teoria da justiça de John Finnis, ressaltando a importância do conceito de razoabilidade prática em sua exposição. São identificados os elementos da justiça, a importância do conteúdo do bem comum em sua análise, bem como a sua divisão da justiça. Por fim, é feita uma breve exposição sobre o que Finnis disse na obra “Aquinas”, em que o referido autor, analisando a obra de Tomás de Aquino, faz suas conclusões a respeito da justiça na ótica do filósofo medieval. Questões às quais Finnis entende como relevantes para serem analisadas sob a luz da justiça são discutidas. / This dissertation tries to answer the question of knowing whether the theory of justice developed by John Finnis in his work “Natural Law and Natural Rights” is in accordance with the Aristotelic-Thomist tradition. For the consecution of this objective, the theory of justice presented by Aristotle in his work “Ethics to Nicomacus” is first developed. Aristotle divides justice in a twofold view: legal justice and private justice and then, he subdivides the latter in distributive justice and corrective justice. Thomas of Aquinas’ theory of justice is then presented, taken from the works “Suma Theology” and “Comments to Aristotle’s Ethics to Nicomacus”. For the analysis of theories, this work followed the structure of the concept of social justice identified by the Prof. Dr. Luis Fernando Barzotto in the article “Justiça Social – Gênese, Estrutura e Aplicação de um Conceito” (“Social Justice – Genesis, Structure and Implementation”). So then, the parts of the concept are specified: the relation regulated by justice; the identification of the wealth to be reached by justice; the activity, performed human action; the benefited subject in the relation of justice; the duty resulted from this relation; its adequateness, formulation and ethic theoretical support. The second part of the work presents John Finnis’s theory of justice, highlighting the importance of the practice reasonableness concept in his exposition. The elements of justice, the importance of the common wealth content in his analysis, as well as his division of justice are identified here. At last, a brief exposition about what Finnis said in the work “Aquinas” is made, where the author, analyzing the works of Thomas of Aquinas, draws conclusions about the justice through the eyes of the medieval philosopher. The questions Finnis understands as relevant for being analyzed through the scope of justice are discussed here.