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

Results found: 9

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  veil of ignorance
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
In this paper I will juxtapose the concept of the veil of ignorance – a fundamental premise of Rawlsian justice as fairness – and solidarity in the context of the organisation of a healthcare system. My hypothesis is that the veil of ignorance could be considered a rhetorical tool that supports compassion solidarity. In the concept of the veil of ignorance, I will find some crucial features of compassion solidarity within the Rawlsian concept of “reciprocity” (actually, not being reciprocity at all) – located between “impartiality” and “mutual advantage”. I conclude that, even behind this “thick” veil, some essential, yet “particular” facts on health and wealth redistribution are available to decision makers. Lastly, I discover that by means of the assumption of self-interest in the original position the veil aims to convert egoism into empathy, thus invoking the solidarity of compassion that in turn could be translated into principles of the organisation of a healthcare system.
PL
The paper considers a fundamental issue set against the backcloth of John Rawls’s theory of justice, namely the structure of its justification system. The issue is so significant, because justification fulfills a key role in the Rawlsian conception. J. Rawls offers a sophisticated system consisting of different arguments aimed at reaching full justification. In the author’s opinion, there are five elements that relate to each other: 1) original position with the idea of the veil of ignorance, 2) reflective equilibrium, 3) public reason, 4) overlapping consensus, and 5) fundamental constructivist ideas. The five above mentioned arguments seem to be based on four different argumentative strategies: 1) a coherentist strategy – referring to the general and internal coherence of the system; 2) a contractualist strategy – based on the notion of social contract; 3) a pragmatic strategy – referring to the connection with effective social practices; and 4) a constructivist strategy which is founded in the particular view of reasonableness. The justification system evolves from A Theory of Justice to Political Liberalism. However, though the system develops, it is always aimed at the same goal – to gather our considered beliefs and facts about a modern society into a coherent set of judgments which may claim to be valid.
Diametros
|
2020
|
vol. 17
|
issue 64
72-89
EN
This paper discusses “impartiality thought experiments”, i.e., thought experiments that attempt to generate intuitions which are unaffected by personal characteristics such as age, gender or race. We focus on the most prominent impartiality thought experiment, the Veil of Ignorance (VOI), and show that both in its original Rawlsian version and in a more generic version, empirical investigations can be normatively relevant in two ways: First, on the assumption that the VOI is effective and robust, if subjects dominantly favor a certain normative judgment behind the VOI this provides evidence in favor of that judgment; if, on the other hand, they do not dominantly favor a judgment this reduces our justification for it. Second, empirical investigations can also contribute to assessing the effectiveness and robustness of the VOI in the first place, thereby supporting or undermining its applications across the board.
5
72%
PL
Sprawiedliwość nigdy nie była konceptem łatwym i przez wieki nastręczała myślicielom różnorakich problemów. Debatowano o jej znaczeniu, zakresie, poszczególnych teoriach, rozumieniu w kontekście człowieka i budowanych przezeń relacji. Nic zatem dziwnego, że właśnie idea sprawiedliwości stała się jednym z zapalnych punktów sporu między zwolennikami liberalizmu budowanego przez Johna Rawlsa, a komunitarianami, reprezentowanymi przez Michaela Sandela czy Michaela Walzera. Moment jej ustalenia, rozumienie, a także sposób budowania na niej wspólnoty poróżnił obie teorie, otwierając dyskusję nad momentem ustalenia się znaczenia wartości, którą odnajdujemy w dyskursie naukowym i publicznym. Choć między przywołanymi komunitarianami pojawiają się znaczące różnice, to analizując sprawiedliwość, widzą oni konkretne przypadki, wskazują na określone sytuacje, w kontekście których należy ją rozpatrywać. Co najistotniejsze, postrzegają sprawiedliwość jako konkret, którego rozważanie i rozumienie jest powiązane z istnieniem wspólnoty. Sprawiedliwość nie jest abstraktem, przedmiotem swoistych negocjacji. Nie kryje się w hipotetycznych, demaskowanych przez komunitarian momentach „sytuacji pierwotnej” czy w działaniu za „zasłoną niewiedzy”. By jednak wykazać chwiejność owych abstrakcji, teorię Johna Rawlsa należy poddać weryfikacji, posługując się przy tym konkretnymi przykładami, pozwalającymi na zdemaskowane niepewności jego sprawiedliwości oraz niestabilności systemu, jaki miałby być na niej oparty.
EN
Justice has never been an easy concept and for centuries it bother the thinkers with various problems. Historians of idea repeatedly debated about its meaning, scope, specific theories, understanding in the context of human and relations that man’s able to built. That idea of justice has become one of the inflammatory points of dispute between supporters of liberalism, built by John Rawls and the communitarians, represented by Michael Sandel or Michael Walzer. The moment of establishing justice, its understanding, as well as a way to build community quarreled both theories, opened a discussion on the significance of this particular value, which can be found in scientific discourse and in public sphere. Although there are signifi cant differences between communitarians, but analyzing the justice they see specific cases, indicate the specific situations in the context of which it must be considered. Most importantly they perceive justice as concrete, which consideration and understanding is linked with the existence of the community as such. Justice is not an abstract or subject of specific negotiations. Justice is not hidden in a hypothetical moment called „the original position” or behind „the veil of ignorance”. However, to show the instability of these abstractions, we have to say „Check” to the theories of John Rawls, and using concrete examples, that allows unmask the uncertainty of Rawls justice and the instability of the system, which would be based on it.
6
Content available remote

Just Solidarity: The Key to Fair Health Care Rationing

72%
EN
I agree with Professor ter Meulen that there is no need to make a forced choice between “justice” and “solidarity” when it comes to determining what should count as fair access to needed health care. But he also asserts that solidarity is more fundamental than justice. That claim needs critical assessment. Ter Meulen recognizes that the concept of solidarity has been criticized for being excessively vague. He addresses this criticism by introducing the more precise notion of “humanitarian solidarity.” However, I argue that these notions are still not precise enough and are in need of behavioral translation, especially in relation to the problem of fair health care rationing. More specifically, I argue that translation ought to take the form of a well-ordered process of rational democratic deliberation, which I describe and defend in this essay. Such a process is what is required to construct a working model of just solidarity as opposed to a merely abstract idealization of just solidarity.
EN
Ethical theory for Adam Smith is first of all the basic mechanism of social controls. Going out from decisions of the matter of the moral feelings, which the ‘sympathy’states the foundation; it tries to work out the neutral criteria of ethical opinions introducing the ‘impartial spectator’ figure. Superiority of this category in relation to John Rawls ‘veil of ignorance’ depends on this, that the Smith places his philosophical theory in the strong empirical context (the kind of sociological philosophy). Social ethicist is the base to build more folded regulators of community life, or social, such as economy and politics. The neutral criteria of ethical opinions are the foundation of different derivative social workings (economy, politics).
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.