Demokrati är en sammanskrivning av de två grekiska orden ’demos’, som betyder folk och ’kratos’, som betyder styre. Demokrati översätts då direkt till ”folkstyre”, vilket innebär att en samling individer, folket, styr över sig självt. För att skapa en heltäckande definition av demokrati krävs det då att man kan definiera vilka folket är, en fråga som benämns som ”avgränsningsproblemet” inom demokratisk teori och som i sort har försummats när demokrati har diskuterats. Denna uppsats diskuterar avgränsningsproblemet och föreslår att problemet bör lösas via ”påverkansprincipen”, vilken hävdar att alla individer som får sina intressen kausalt påverkade av ett beslut taget av en demokrati har rätt att ingå i demokratins folk.

No description available.

Carl Hoeferʼs “freedom from the inside out” is a compatibilist account of freedom that claims that we can have a robust kind of freedom even if the world is deterministic. The key insight is that determinism belongs in tenseless B-series time in the block universe, not in our everyday notions of the world where time is experienced in a tensed way with a past, a present, and a future, where the past is viewed as fixed and the future as open. The block universe is time symmetric, i.e., determination can go in both temporal direction, and no particular part of the block universe is determined or fixed prior to any other part. Therefore,we do not have to think of deterministic logical relations as placing constraints on our actions in advance. Instead, we are free to view our actions as primary explainers that very partially determine both the future and the past. Since our actions are thought to place constraints on the microscopic past, it will be argued that Hoeferʼs account can question the Consequence Argument, the well-known incompatibilist argument that claims that if the past and the laws are not up to us, the consequences of the past and the laws cannot be up to us either, which includes our present actions. Hence, it will be argued that by rejecting that the past is not up to us, Hoeferʼs account can refute the Consequence Argument, which removes one possible threat to our freedom. / Carl Hoefers “frihet från insidan ut” är en kompatibilistisk teori om frihet som hävdar att vi kan ha en robust sorts frihet även om världen är deterministisk. Den centrala idén är att determinism hör hemma i den statiska B-seriens tid i blockuniversumet, inte i världen såsom vi upplever den med ett förflutet, ett nu, och en framtid, där det förflutna upplevs som fixerat och framtiden som öppen. Blockuniversumet är tidssymmetriskt, vilket innebär att determinationen kan gå både framåt och bakåt, och ingen specifik del av blockuniversumet är determinerad eller fixerad före någon annan del. Därför behöver vi inte tänka på de deterministiska logiska relationerna som någonting som i förväg begränsar hur vi kan agera. Vi är istället fria att betrakta våra handlingar som primära förklarare som är delaktiga i att determinera både det förflutna och framtiden. Eftersom Hoefer menar att våra handlingar begränsar hur det mikroskopiska förflutna kan vara, så kommer det att argumenteras för att Hoefers teori kan ifrågasätta konsekvensargumentet, vilket är ett välkänt inkompatibilistiskt argument som säger att eftersom det förflutna och naturlagarna inte är upptill oss, så kan inte heller konsekvenserna av det förflutna och naturlagarna vara upp till oss, således kan inte våra handlingar vara upp till oss. Genom att förneka att det förflutna inte är upp till oss, så kan Hoefers idéer avvisa konsekvensargumentet, vilket tar bort ett möjligt hot mot vår frihet.

The processes of “othering” often create coarse images of “the other”, therefore there is a need to rethink the narrative of “the other”. A fruitful narrative of “the other” could be helpful in the interaction in multi-religious and multicultural social settings. The aim is to scrutinize the narrative of “the other” in Christian thought, in order to see if there is a Christian particular and fruitful narrative of “the other”, and if so, if this representation is useful in peace-processes. This study investigates how the representation of “the other” from a Christian context may be helpful in shifting attitudes. Specifically, it investigates the history and settings of “the other” and “othering”, and tries to find a more inclusive approach. In order to test the hypothesis that a fruitful narrative on “the other” could be beneficial in peace-processes, an analysis is done of “the other” within Christian faith. This takes place in distinction to the phenomenological and ethical perspective, with a broad set of literature and articles. This qualitative literature analysis examines the Christology and ecclesiology in Stanley Hauerwas’ and Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s theological writings, with the help of a theoretical framework, which is developed to classify structural features.  The results suggest that there is a potentiality in redefining “the other”, and that Bonhoeffer’s and Hauerwas’ understanding of the narrative of “the other” leads to belonging (inclusivism) rather than exclusivism. On this basis, this narrative should be taken into account in peace-processes, because an understanding of “the other” is beneficial in accepting differences as something that unite us rather than divide us.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

Year 2015, Sweden received approximately 163 000 refugees, whom almost half of were children. To combat these, according to the Swedish state overwhelming numbers, a temporary law was put in place in 2016. The law came to be extended and valid until 19th July 2021. This was a hard hit primarily towards children.  The purpose of this thesis is to critically analyze how children rights and human rights are interpreted when judicial judgments are passed within the context of asylum. To conduct this study, the work of inter alia, Louise Danes thesis has been studied, which gives us insight of the jurisprudence and the application of human rights in Swedish public right. Sweden outright implemented the “Convention on the Rights of the Child” into its own laws as is, without skewing or reformulating it in 2020, which is analyzed in this study. This study observes the first judgment made after the installment of this law, within an asylum case, regarding a 14 year old girl. What is also analyzed are documents of policy, from the Swedish Migration Agency regarding their understanding of human rights and application of it. The material in this study is analyzed from an ethical and critical standpoint, based on the thoughts of Ronald Dworkin and Elena Namli.  The study shows that the interpretation of human rights and children rights within public right is ambiguous. What has been shed light on based on this study, is that the authority uses certain laws to nullify the principle regarding the best interest of the child. In “hard cases” the state tend to apply laws to justify the compromise of a child’s human rights.  Keywords: asylum in Sweden, stateless Palestinian children, moral principles, Swedish Migration Agency, children’s right, human rights, Convention on the Rights of the Child

”Normalizing” surgeries on intersex children with ambiguous genitalia have faced an increasing amount of criticism from human rights bodies during the last decade. Despite this fact, most European nations still allow medically unnecessary procedures that aim to ”normalize” intersex children’s bodies. Sweden is one of many countries that continues to preform ”normalizing” surgeries on  small minors. The first purpose of this thesis is to comprehend why this happens to be the case. To accomplish this, I have identified political reasonings in Swedish politics and ethical reasonings in Swedish medical literature that explains Sweden’s stance on the subject. The second purpose of the thesis is to analyze whether these reasonings undermine or strengthen the human dignity of intersex children.  The study has shown that there are several reasons as to why ”normalizing” surgeries  continue to be allowed in Sweden. Regarding the political reasonings it has become clear that the surgeries tend to be ignored within Swedish politics since they are viewed as a medical issue. The reluctance to address the topic contributes to Sweden’s unwillingness to ban the practice, along with the political tendency to downplay or ignore the human rights violations that the surgeries entail. The ethical reasonings that Swedish medicine has used to justify the surgeries have been shown to rely on the claim that ”normalizing” surgeries can be necessary  to advocate for the best interest of the child. This position is partially based on the presumption that children with normative bodies are more likely to be accepted by their parents and society at large.  Even though the reasonings behind Sweden’s continued performance of the surgeries seem to have the children’s best interest at heart, I spend the thesis arguing that they nonetheless undermine the human dignity of intersex children. The medical community’s claim that the surgeries are performed in the best interest of the child immediately become problematic when it becomes clear that some intersex individuals have experienced the surgeries as a form of mutilation. With the help of Butler and Hedenius I further argue that it is contrary to the human dignity of intersex children to subject them to unnecessary surgeries with the aim of increasing the environments acceptance of the child. I also point out several ethical problems regarding the political tendency to downplay the critique directed towards ”normalizing” medical procedures.