Priority of liberty under non-ideal circumstances

Leandro Martins Zanitelli

Resumo


This work addresses the applicability of Rawls’s theory of justice in non-ideal circumstances. The goal, more particularly, is to assess the urgency role that Rawls and some of his interpreters confer to justice of fairness under non-ideal circumstances. In Rawls’s case, the urgency role means, in sum, that infringements to the first principle of justice (the basic liberties principle) must be treated as more serious and urging than infringements to the second principle. The paper’s main conclusion is that a “strong” understanding of this role has unbearable consequences, worse still than those entailed by the same relation of lexical priority between the two principles under the (ideal) condition of strict compliance. The problem is that, in circumstances of no strict compliance, scarcity of political means needed to make institutional improvements may impose total neglect of second principle issues until the first principle is wholly satisfied.

Palavras-chave


Liberty, Priority, Non-Ideal Theory, Strict Compliance, Rawls

Texto completo:

PDF (English)

Referências


Author’s work 2016

Alexander, Larry, 1986, Fair Equality of Opportunity: John Rawls’ (best) Forgotten Principle, Philosophy Research Articles 11: 197-208.

Arneson, Richard, 1999, Against Rawlsian Equality of Opportunity, Philosophical Studies 93: 77-112.

Barry, Brian, 1973, Rawls and the Priority of Liberty, Philosophy & Public Affairs 2: 274-90.

Hamlin, Alan, and Stemplowska, Zofia, 2012, Theory, Ideal Theory and the Theory of Ideals, Political Studies 10: 48-62.

Hart, Herbert L. A., 1973, Rawls on Liberty and its Priority, University of Chicago Law Review 40: 534-55.

Pogge, Thomas W., 1995, Three Problems with Contractarian-Consequentialist Ways of Assessing Social Institutions, Social Philosophy and Policy 12: 241-66.

Rawls, John, 1993, Political Liberalism, New York: Columbia University Press

Rawls, John, 1999, A Theory of Justice, Cambridge: Belknap Press.

Rawls, John, 2001, Justice as Fairness: A Restatement, Cambridge: Belknap Press.

Sen, Amartya, 2009, The Idea of Justice, Cambridge: Belknap Press.

Simmons, A. John, 2010, Ideal and Non-Ideal Theory, Philosophy & Public Affairs 38: 5-36.

Stemplowska, Zofia, and Swift, Adam, 2014, Rawls on Ideal and Nonideal Theory, in Mandle, Jon, and Reidy, David A., A Companion to Rawls, Malden: Blackwell.

Valentini, Laura, 2012, Ideal Vs. Non-ideal Theory: A Conceptual Map, Philosophy Compass 7: 654-64.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.26694/pensando.v9i18.7738

DOI (PDF (English)): https://doi.org/10.26694/pensando.v9i18.7738.g5018

Licença Creative Commons
Esta obra está licenciada sob uma licença Creative Commons Atribuição - NãoComercial 4.0 Internacional.


INDEXADA EM/INDEXED BY:

Logotipo do Sumarios   Logotipo do DOAJ Logotipo do IBICT  Logotipo da rede Cariniana  Logotipo do LatIndex 

Logotipo da ANPOF Logotipo da MIAR

Logotipo do Portal Periodicos Logotipo da Diadorim Logotipo do Philosopher's Index

Logotipo da LIVRE   Logotipo da PhilPaper   Logotipo da CrossRef   Logotipo da SUDOC   Logotipo da BELUGA   Logotipo da ERIH PLUS 

 



ENDEREÇO/MAIL ADDRESS:

Universidade Federal do Piauí, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Filosofia, Centro de Ciências Humanas e Letras, Campus Min. Petrônio Portela,

CEP 64.049-550,  Teresina - PI, Fone: (86) 3237 1134  E-mail: revista.pensando@gmail.com



 

OUTROS LINKS:

  Logotipo da Capes   Logotipo do CNPq   Logotipo da UFPI  Logotipo da FAPEPI

 


ISSN 2178-843X