Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 4

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  LIBERTARIANISM
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

WAGE INEQUALITIES FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF JUST DISTRIBUTION

100%
Beata R.
Zarządzanie Zasobami Ludzkimi
|
2010
|
issue 2(73)
49-70
PL
Nierówności wynagrodzeń na rynku pracy mogą być rozpatrywane z różnych punktów widzenia, np.: ekonomicznego, społecznego lub etycznego. Celem niniejszej pracy jest przedstawienie etycznego uzasadnienia nierówności wynagrodzeń z perspektywy teorii sprawiedliwości dystrybutywnej. W poszukiwaniu odpowiedzi na pytanie, jak wielkie nierówności w wynagrodzeniach postrzegane są za sprawiedliwe, zostaną zaprezentowane trzy stanowiska. Pierwsze z nich, reprezentowane przez Friedricha von Hayeka, jednego z największych zwolenników mechanizmu rynkowego, podważa zasadność mówienia o sprawiedliwości dystrybutywnej w gospodarce rynkowej. Drugie, wypracowane na gruncie teorii utylitarystycznych, odpowiadając na pytanie o sprawiedliwość nierówności wynagrodzeń, koncentruje uwagę na konsekwencjach, do których one prowadzą. Trzecie, uzasadniane zarówno egalitarystyczną teorią sprawiedliwości dystrybutywnej Johna Rawlsa, jak i odmienną od niej libertariańską teorią Roberta Nozicka, przekonuje, że o sprawiedliwości podziału decydują nie jego konsekwencje, lecz zasady, na podstawie których do niego doszło.
EN
Wages inequalities can be investigated from various points of view - economic, social, and ethical. This paper examines the ethics of inequalities in wages. Three leading theories of distributive justice - utilitarianism, libertarianism, Rawlsian egalitarianism - as well as Hayek's approach are applied to investigate the question of justice in high levels of inequality. The conclusion is that neither the theories of distributive justice nor Hayek's approach, justify the high level of inequalities.
2

Ralph W. Emerson i neoplatońska filozofia sztuki

86%
Rubiś W.
Kwartalnik Filozoficzny
|
2017
|
vol. 45
|
issue 3
133-142
EN
In the article I present the figure of philosopher and speaker Ralph W. Emerson from the perspective of the tradition of Platonic and Neoplatonic philosophy. I focus on the issues of a work of art and ethics (moral philosophy), and I emphasize the value of Emerson's philosophy for the contemporary philosophy of freedom and libertarianism.
3

K NEGATÍVNEMU NAZERANIU M. ROTHBARDA NA MYŠLIENKU PRÁV ZVIERAT

86%
Turčan M.
Filozofia (Philosophy)
|
2020
|
vol. 75
|
issue 7
539 – 554
EN
The article deals with the approach of the right-wing libertarian, anarchy-capitalist, Murray Rothbard to the issue of animal rights. The author offers a critical analysis of his dismissal statements in the work Ethics of Liberty. He deals with Rothbard's arguments and confronts them with the arguments of Peter Singer and Gary Francione. The author pays special attention to Rothbardʼs argument from the nature of animal warfare, which is one of the reasons for Rothbardʼs view on animal rights. Based on a hypothetical example of beings from another world, which Rothbard himself mentions, the author refutes his argument and points to the problem of inconsistency in Rothbardʼs thinking. Given that this argument is not (and cannot be) a central argument for Rothbard, the author then focuses on Rothbardʼs central argument from the very notion of the concept of a right. The difference between Rothbard and Francione is, in this respect, conceptual (each of them works with a different understanding of the concept of a right). The difference between Rothbard and Singer is basically paradigmatic. In this context, the author points out that both anarchy-capitalism and utilitarianism are reductionist theories. He considers the need to find a non-reductionist solution. However, in the controversy, he leans to the side of Singer, due to the moral inadmissibility of Rothbardʼs assumption of the priority of individual freedom over relevance of any moral good or evil (under the respect of persons but not of other sentient beings), which cannot be understood other than Rothbardʼs ethical thesis.
4

Być czy mieć? Pochwała posiadania i własności

58%
Guczalska K.
Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Krakowie
|
2012
|
issue 887
37-56
EN
In the text, I attempt to question the justifiability of Erich Fromm’s distinction: “to have or to be?”. In practice, the phrase is used in various contexts and discussions and is not associated with the ideas of its author. The catchphrase’s popularity comes from the fact that it managed to express the attainments of many centuries of religion and philosophy, which may be defined as axiology branding devotion to material things. The axiology is usually adopted as unquestionable. My thesis is that axiology is, in fact, a debatable evaluation. I present my own views and those of Bronisław Łagowski, which he presented in his paper Palę Fromma (I burn Fromm). I also cite real cases of negation and affirmation of private property. I discuss the negation of property made by Plato and its critique undertaken by Aristotle. I analyse the affirmations of private property which are the strongest in West European culture – liberal thought and libertarianism. I think that one should develop and form one’s mind so as to relieve oneself from the devotion to things. It does not, however, have to be achieved through the fight with and negation of the phenomena required for subsistence. Things are not negative in themselves. The desire and drive to possess material things may be perceived as a valuable phenomenon – both from an economic and a moral point of view. The community needs people who are responsible, resourceful and well-off, which means people who have something to lose. In this text, I am mostly interested in the “transposition” of the adopted metaphysical assumptions in the practice of social life.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.