共和党人批判自由主义的可能性

Q3 Arts and Humanities
Reflexe Pub Date : 2024-04-07 DOI:10.14712/25337637.2024.4
Jan Buráň
{"title":"共和党人批判自由主义的可能性","authors":"Jan Buráň","doi":"10.14712/25337637.2024.4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article explores the possibilities of using civic republicanism in order to criticize Nozickian libertarianism on the ground of its own premises, especially the emphasis it puts on individual freedom. It evaluates the critique to which Nozick’s theory has been subjected to by Ian Shapiro, finding Shapiro’s objections lacking in understanding, yet valid in principle. The second line of attack is then led via the notion of freedom as non-domination (which inextricably intertwines it with democracy) and via the needs which must be satisfied in order for a state to function as a safeguard for liberty in the contemporary world of multinational corporations.","PeriodicalId":53484,"journal":{"name":"Reflexe","volume":"69 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Možnosti republikánské kritiky libertariánství\",\"authors\":\"Jan Buráň\",\"doi\":\"10.14712/25337637.2024.4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article explores the possibilities of using civic republicanism in order to criticize Nozickian libertarianism on the ground of its own premises, especially the emphasis it puts on individual freedom. It evaluates the critique to which Nozick’s theory has been subjected to by Ian Shapiro, finding Shapiro’s objections lacking in understanding, yet valid in principle. The second line of attack is then led via the notion of freedom as non-domination (which inextricably intertwines it with democracy) and via the needs which must be satisfied in order for a state to function as a safeguard for liberty in the contemporary world of multinational corporations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53484,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Reflexe\",\"volume\":\"69 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Reflexe\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14712/25337637.2024.4\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reflexe","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14712/25337637.2024.4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

文章探讨了利用公民共和主义批评诺齐克自由主义的可能性,批评的依据是其自身的前提,尤其是其对个人自由的强调。文章评估了伊恩-夏皮罗(Ian Shapiro)对诺齐克理论的批判,发现夏皮罗的反对意见缺乏理解,但原则上是正确的。然后,通过自由即非统治的概念(这一概念与民主密不可分),以及在跨国公司林立的当代世界,国家作为自由的保障所必须满足的需求,引出了第二条攻击路线。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Možnosti republikánské kritiky libertariánství
The article explores the possibilities of using civic republicanism in order to criticize Nozickian libertarianism on the ground of its own premises, especially the emphasis it puts on individual freedom. It evaluates the critique to which Nozick’s theory has been subjected to by Ian Shapiro, finding Shapiro’s objections lacking in understanding, yet valid in principle. The second line of attack is then led via the notion of freedom as non-domination (which inextricably intertwines it with democracy) and via the needs which must be satisfied in order for a state to function as a safeguard for liberty in the contemporary world of multinational corporations.
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
Reflexe
Reflexe Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
30
审稿时长
25 weeks
×
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