The aim of this study is to make a comparison between Rousseau&rsquo / s and Kant&rsquo / s theory of justice. This thesis defends the arguments of Rousseau&rsquo / s democratic political theory against the claims raised by Kant. Rousseau and Kant formulate how to relieve the tension between individual and society. This tension is the one between individual and political freedom. Rousseau calls it the tension between moral and political freedom and Kant terms it as internal and external freedom. However, Rousseau ensures continuity between two concepts of freedom, whereas Kant seems inconsistent. The main argument of this thesis is that the critical potential of Rousseau&rsquo / s notion of the social contract is jeopardized by Kant&rsquo / s Idea of original contract in which the sovereign authority is taken away from people since Rousseau&rsquo / s notion of the social contract turns into Idea of original contract in Kant&rsquo / s theory of justice. In this regard, this thesis particularly seeks to answer the question of what constitutes the legitimacy of the contract in their theory of justice.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:METU/oai:etd.lib.metu.edu.tr:http://etd.lib.metu.edu.tr/upload/12613327/index.pdf |
| Date | 01 May 2011 |
| Creators | Unlu, Ozlem |
| Contributors | Turan, Halil |
| Publisher | METU |
| Source Sets | Middle East Technical Univ. |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | M.A. Thesis |
| Format | text/pdf |
| Rights | To liberate the content for public access |
Page generated in 0.002 seconds