Results found: 2

Search results

Search:
in the keywords: workload dispute

Sort By:

Limit search:

Równość versus sprawiedliwość

100%

Bartula P.

Annales. Etyka w Życiu Gospodarczym

2014

vol. 17

issue 1

87-93

On the example of a workload dispute (a version of a ‘border dispute’) I present the general problem of two persons – M and P – with equal entitlements to one commodity, which is equally desired by both of them. They are both moderately altruistic; they are not angels untempted by a selfish willingness to get their own way, nor are they devils, who want to destroy others even if it leads to self-destruction. As human beings operating in a world of limited goods, they are so physically and intellectually feeble that neither of them is able to permanently enslave the other and submit him to the second person’s will. Such being the case, each solution to the problem means that the profit of one person is the loss of the second. The question, whether justice is possible at all, suggests itself whether in a situation when people are more or less equal, or with limited altruism and/or selfishness and scarce resources.

Równość versus sprawiedliwość

75%

Bartula P.

Prakseologia

2016

vol. 158/2

137-151

Na konkretnym przykładzie sporu o pensum (klasyczny wariant „sporu o miedzę”) przedstawiam ogólny problem identycznych uprawnień dwóch równych sobie Polaków – Mariusza i Piotra – do pożądanego przez nich w równym stopniu tego samego dobra. Obu cechuje ograniczony altruizm; nie są ani aniołami, których nie kusi samolubna chęć postawienia na swoim, ani diabłami, którzy chcą niszczyć innych nawet kosztem zniszczenia samych siebie. Powstaje pytanie, czy sprawiedliwość – w warunkach przybliżonej równości ludzi, ograniczonego altruizmu i/lub samolubstwa oraz ograniczonych zasobów – jest aby w ogóle w świecie ludzkim możliwa.

On the example of a workload dispute (a version of a ‘border dispute’). I present the general problem of two persons – M and P – with equal entitlements to one commodity, which is equally desired by both of them. They are both moderately altruistic; they are not angels untempted by a selfi sh willingness to get their own way, nor are they devils, who want to destroy others even if it leads to self-destruction. As human beings operating in a world of limited goods, they are so physically and intellectually feeble that neither of them is able to permanently enslave the other and submit him to the second person’s will. Such being the case, each solution to the problem means that the profit of one person is the loss of the second. The question, whether justice is possible at all, suggests itself whether in a situation when people are more or less equal, or with limited altruism and/or selfishness and scarce resources.

Refine search results

1 Annales. Etyka w Życiu Gospodarczym

1 Prakseologia

2 Bartula P.

1 2016

1 2014

Search results

Równość versus sprawiedliwość

Równość versus sprawiedliwość