对凯尔森对亚里士多德正义观批判的回应

A. C. Prado
{"title":"对凯尔森对亚里士多德正义观批判的回应","authors":"A. C. Prado","doi":"10.25100/PFILOSOFICA.V0I48.7303","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Kelsen wrote a book, much less known than his Reine Rechtslehre (Pure Theory of Law), called Was ist Gerechtigkeit (What is Justice), in which he attempts to show how and why several theories of justice, formulated by authors ranging from Greece to European Illuminism, are wrong. One of those concepts is Aristotle’s, as exposed in his Nichomachean Ethics. In this article, I argue that in order to show Aristotle wrong, Kelsen misinterprets his theory, then ignores the practical consequences it implies. I attempt to demonstrate that, although highly influenced by the (retrograde) mores of his time, Aristotle’s theory can be useful to us today, which Kelsen denies. Finally, I present a challenge regarding one point raised by Kelsen which is particularly hard to reply.","PeriodicalId":32513,"journal":{"name":"Praxis Filosofica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A reply to Kelsen's critique of Aristotle's concept of justice\",\"authors\":\"A. C. Prado\",\"doi\":\"10.25100/PFILOSOFICA.V0I48.7303\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Kelsen wrote a book, much less known than his Reine Rechtslehre (Pure Theory of Law), called Was ist Gerechtigkeit (What is Justice), in which he attempts to show how and why several theories of justice, formulated by authors ranging from Greece to European Illuminism, are wrong. One of those concepts is Aristotle’s, as exposed in his Nichomachean Ethics. In this article, I argue that in order to show Aristotle wrong, Kelsen misinterprets his theory, then ignores the practical consequences it implies. I attempt to demonstrate that, although highly influenced by the (retrograde) mores of his time, Aristotle’s theory can be useful to us today, which Kelsen denies. Finally, I present a challenge regarding one point raised by Kelsen which is particularly hard to reply.\",\"PeriodicalId\":32513,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Praxis Filosofica\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-12-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Praxis Filosofica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.25100/PFILOSOFICA.V0I48.7303\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Praxis Filosofica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25100/PFILOSOFICA.V0I48.7303","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

凯尔森写了一本书,比他的《纯粹法律理论》(Reine Rechtslehre)鲜为人知,名为《正义是什么》(Was ist Gerechtigkeit),在这本书中,他试图说明从希腊到欧洲光明会的作者们所提出的几种正义理论是如何以及为什么是错误的。其中一个概念是亚里士多德的,在他的《尼各马可伦理学》中有所揭示。在本文中,我认为,为了证明亚里士多德是错误的,凯尔森误解了他的理论,然后忽视了它所隐含的实际后果。我试图证明,尽管受到他那个时代(逆行的)习俗的高度影响,亚里士多德的理论对今天的我们仍然有用,而凯尔森否认了这一点。最后,我对Kelsen提出的一个特别难以回答的观点提出了挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A reply to Kelsen's critique of Aristotle's concept of justice
Kelsen wrote a book, much less known than his Reine Rechtslehre (Pure Theory of Law), called Was ist Gerechtigkeit (What is Justice), in which he attempts to show how and why several theories of justice, formulated by authors ranging from Greece to European Illuminism, are wrong. One of those concepts is Aristotle’s, as exposed in his Nichomachean Ethics. In this article, I argue that in order to show Aristotle wrong, Kelsen misinterprets his theory, then ignores the practical consequences it implies. I attempt to demonstrate that, although highly influenced by the (retrograde) mores of his time, Aristotle’s theory can be useful to us today, which Kelsen denies. Finally, I present a challenge regarding one point raised by Kelsen which is particularly hard to reply.
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
28
审稿时长
12 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:604180095
Book学术官方微信