迈克尔-桑德尔对罗尔斯思想的军国主义批判

Julio Tomé
{"title":"迈克尔-桑德尔对罗尔斯思想的军国主义批判","authors":"Julio Tomé","doi":"10.18012/arf.v10i2.63424","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper will investigate one of the main critiques of Rawlsian thought that emerged in the aftermath of the publication of A Theory of Justice in 1971, namely the communitarian critique by Michael Sandel. According to Sandel, Rawls starts from a radically disembodied subject, a unity of the self, from a human subject as a sovereign agent of choice, a creature whose ends are chosen rather than given. In Sandel's view, the original position is not a contract, but the realization of an intersubjective being.Against Sandel's reading, this paper will argue that the parties in the original position are not the affirmation of a liberal, individualized subject, because they are neither thought of as real persons nor as future persons, just as they do not represent who people really are or their true selfs. The idea is that justice as fairness is based on a normative conception of citizens as free and equal moral persons but does not presuppose any metaphysical conception of person. Thus, it will be argued that from the later works of A Theory of Justice – with the change in the Rawlsian perspective of people, highlighting the two moral powers (rationality and reasonableness), and the idea of full autonomy (belonging to the citizens of the well-ordered society) – the communitarian critiques of Rawls' thought fall definitively to the ground.","PeriodicalId":268271,"journal":{"name":"Aufklärung: journal of philosophy","volume":"130 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Contra as críticas comunitaristas de Michael Sandel ao pensamento de Rawls\",\"authors\":\"Julio Tomé\",\"doi\":\"10.18012/arf.v10i2.63424\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper will investigate one of the main critiques of Rawlsian thought that emerged in the aftermath of the publication of A Theory of Justice in 1971, namely the communitarian critique by Michael Sandel. According to Sandel, Rawls starts from a radically disembodied subject, a unity of the self, from a human subject as a sovereign agent of choice, a creature whose ends are chosen rather than given. In Sandel's view, the original position is not a contract, but the realization of an intersubjective being.Against Sandel's reading, this paper will argue that the parties in the original position are not the affirmation of a liberal, individualized subject, because they are neither thought of as real persons nor as future persons, just as they do not represent who people really are or their true selfs. The idea is that justice as fairness is based on a normative conception of citizens as free and equal moral persons but does not presuppose any metaphysical conception of person. Thus, it will be argued that from the later works of A Theory of Justice – with the change in the Rawlsian perspective of people, highlighting the two moral powers (rationality and reasonableness), and the idea of full autonomy (belonging to the citizens of the well-ordered society) – the communitarian critiques of Rawls' thought fall definitively to the ground.\",\"PeriodicalId\":268271,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Aufklärung: journal of philosophy\",\"volume\":\"130 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Aufklärung: journal of philosophy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18012/arf.v10i2.63424\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aufklärung: journal of philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18012/arf.v10i2.63424","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文将探讨1971年《正义论》出版后出现的对罗尔斯思想的主要批评之一,即迈克尔·桑德尔的社群主义批评。根据桑德尔的观点,罗尔斯从一个完全无实体的主体出发,一个自我的统一,从一个作为自主选择的主体出发,一个目的是被选择而不是被给定的生物。在桑德尔看来,原始地位不是一种契约,而是一种主体间存在的实现。与桑德尔的解读相反,本文将论证,处于原始位置的各方并不是对自由主义、个体化主体的肯定,因为他们既没有被认为是真实的人,也没有被认为是未来的人,就像他们不代表人的真实身份或他们的真实自我一样。这种观点认为,作为公平的正义是基于公民作为自由平等的道德人的规范概念,但并不以任何形而上学的人的概念为前提。因此,从《正义论》的后期作品来看,随着罗尔斯对人的看法的变化,强调了两种道德力量(理性和合理性),以及完全自治的观念(属于秩序良好的社会的公民),对罗尔斯思想的社群主义批评最终落在了地。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Contra as críticas comunitaristas de Michael Sandel ao pensamento de Rawls
This paper will investigate one of the main critiques of Rawlsian thought that emerged in the aftermath of the publication of A Theory of Justice in 1971, namely the communitarian critique by Michael Sandel. According to Sandel, Rawls starts from a radically disembodied subject, a unity of the self, from a human subject as a sovereign agent of choice, a creature whose ends are chosen rather than given. In Sandel's view, the original position is not a contract, but the realization of an intersubjective being.Against Sandel's reading, this paper will argue that the parties in the original position are not the affirmation of a liberal, individualized subject, because they are neither thought of as real persons nor as future persons, just as they do not represent who people really are or their true selfs. The idea is that justice as fairness is based on a normative conception of citizens as free and equal moral persons but does not presuppose any metaphysical conception of person. Thus, it will be argued that from the later works of A Theory of Justice – with the change in the Rawlsian perspective of people, highlighting the two moral powers (rationality and reasonableness), and the idea of full autonomy (belonging to the citizens of the well-ordered society) – the communitarian critiques of Rawls' thought fall definitively to the ground.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信