Search results

Filters

  • Journals
  • Keywords
  • Date

Search results

Number of results: 4
items per page: 25 50 75
Sort by:
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

This paper aims at presenting a transcendental argument, so termed and constructed by John Rawls, as a justification of his theory of ‘justice as fairness’. The crucial stage in the chain of his reasoning is to establish the necessary condition of the political arrangement of the basic structure of society. This condition turns out to be acceptability of the publicly endorsed principles in the original position. However, the procedure of exercising free choice, as described by Rawls, presupposes a philosophical view of human nature, and consequently undermines the presumably purely theoretical basis for the principles of justice. The author discusses the impact of Kantian moral philosophy on Rawls’s theory of justification. He tries to show that the rejection of moral theory in favour of political philosophy was the result of a profound change in Rawls’s attitude to the idea of transcendentalism, as it is evidenced by his later thought.
Go to article

Bibliography

Allison H. (2016), Transcendental Deduction and Transcendental Idealism, „European Journal of Philosophy” 4 (24), s. 920–933.
Ameriks K. (2001), Text and Context: Hermeneutical Prolegomena to Interpreting a Kant Text, w: D. Schönecker, T. Zwenger (red.), Kant verstehen / Understanding Kant. Über die Interpretation philosophischer Texte, Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, s. 11–31.
Białek P. (2017), Pycha i skromność rozumu. Współczesny spór o argumenty transcendentalne a filozofia Kanta i Fichtego, Kraków: Universitas.
Callanan J.J. (2011), Making Sense of Doubt: Strawson’s Anti‑Scepticism, „Theoria” 77 (3), s. 261–278.
Grygianiec M. (2019), Status argumentacji transcendentalnej, „Przegląd Filozoficzny – Nowa Seria” 4 (112), s. 131–160.
Guyer P. (2001), Naturalizing Kant, w: D. Schönecker, T. Zwenger (red.), Kant verstehen / Understanding Kant. Über die Interpretation philosophischer Texte, Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, s. 59–84.
Kant I. (1957), Krytyka czystego rozumu, przeł. R. Ingarden, t. I, Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.
Kant I. (1999), Critique of Pure Reason, przeł. i opr. P. Guyer, A.W. Wood, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kędziora K. (2019), John Rawls. Uzasadnienie, sprawiedliwość i rozum publiczny, Bibliotheca Philosophica 5, Łódź: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego.
Korsgaard Ch. (1995), Rawls and Kant: On the Primacy of the Practical, „Proceedings of the Eighth International Kant Congress”, t. I, Memphis 1999, s. 1165–1173.
Palmer H. (1985), Presupposition and Transcendental Inference, New York: Routledge.
Poręba M. (2008), Możliwość rozumu. Ćwiczenia z metafizyki, Warszawa: Fundacja Aletheia.
Rawls J. (1977), The Basic Structure as Subject, „American Philosophical Quarterly” 2 (14), s. 159–165.
Rawls J. (1980), Kantian Constructivism in Moral Philosophy, „The Journal of Philosophy” 9 (77), s. 515–572.
Rawls J. (1985), Justice as Fairness: Political not Metaphysical, „Philosophy & Public Affairs” 3 (14), s. 223–251.
Rawls J. (1989), Themes in Kant’s Moral Philosophy, w: E. Förster (red.), Kant’s Transcendental Deductions. The Three Critiques and the Opus postumum, Stanford: Stanford University Press, s. 81–113.
Rawls J. (1993), Political Liberalism, New York: Harvard University Press.
Rawls J. (2000), Lectures on the history of moral philosophy, red. B. Herman, Cambridge, MA – London: Harvard University Press.
Rawls J. (2001), Justice as Fairness: A Restatement, red. E. Kelly, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Rawls J. (2013), Teoria sprawiedliwości, przeł. M. Panufnik, J. Pasek, A. Romaniuk, Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
Rorty R. (1999), Pierwszeństwo demokracji wobec filozofii, w: tenże, Obiektywność, relatywizm i prawda. Pisma filozoficzne, przeł. J. Margański, t. I, Warszawa: Fundacja Aletheia, s. 261–291.
Russell B. (2000), Dzieje filozofii Zachodu i jej związki z rzeczywistością polityczno-‑społeczną od czasów najdawniejszych do dnia dzisiejszego, przeł. T. Baszniak, A. Lipszyc, M. Szczubiałka, Warszawa: Fundacja Aletheia.
Sandel M. (1982), Liberalism and the Limits of Justice, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sellars W. (1956), Empiricism and the Philosophy of Mind, „Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science” I, s. 253–329.
Sellars W. (1967), Some Remarks on Kant’s Theory of Experience, „Journal of Philosophy” 64, s. 633–647.
Sellars W. (1968), Science and Metaphysics. Variations on Kantian Themes, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Strawson P.F. (1959), Individuals: An Essay in Descriptive Metaphysics, London: Methuen.
Strawson P.F. (1966), The Bounds of Sense, London: Methuen. Tampio N. (2007), Rawls and the Kantian Ethos, „Polity” 1 (39), s. 79–102.
Wolniewicz B. (2017), Aksjomat Elzenberga, „Przegląd Filozoficzny – Nowa Seria” 4 (110), s. 277–288.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Stanisław Jędrczak
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Uniwersytet Warszawski, Wydział Filozofii, ul. Krakowskie Przedmieście 3, 00‑927 Warszawa
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The article discusses Rawls’s idea of the original position. I present two arguments in support of the claim that it is impossible to meet the necessary conditions (proposed by Rawls) for recreating the reasoning that presumably is performed in the original position. I claim therefore that the idea of the original position cannot fulfil its function of justifying the principles of justice. As the solution to the problem I propose a modified version of the original position argument, which can be labeled ‘a slightly lifted veil of ignorance’.
Go to article

Bibliography

Bostrom N. (2003), Are you living in a computer simulation?, „Philosophical Quarterly” 53, s. 243–255.
Chyrowicz B. (2021), Widok stąd. Dlaczego działamy tak, a nie inaczej?, Kraków: Znak.
Dworkin R. (1977), Justice as Rights, w: tenże, Taking Rights Seriously, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, s. 150–183.
Freeman S. (2007), Rawls, London – New York: Routledge.
Graham P. (2007), Rawls, Oxford: Oneworld.
Hare R.M. (1973), Rawls’s Theory of Justice II, „The Philosophical Quarterly” 23, s. 241–252.
Hinton T. (2015), Introduction, w: tenże (red.), The Original Position, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, s. 1–17.
Kukathas Ch., Pettit P. (1990), Rawls:„A Theory of Justice” and its Critics, Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Levin M. (1978), The Problem of Knowledge in the Original Position, „Auslegung: A Journal of Philosophy” 5 (3), s. 147–159.
Mulhall A., Swift A. (1996), Liberals and Communitarians, wyd. II, Oxford – Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
Rawls J. (1999), Theory of Justice. Revised Edition, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Rawls J. (2001a), Outline of a Decision Procedure for Ethics, w: tenże, Collected Papers, red. S. Freeman, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, s. 1–19.
Rawls J. (2001b), The Independence of Moral Theory, w: tenże, Collected Papers, red. S. Freeman, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, s. 286–302.
Rawls J. (2001c), Justice as Fairness: Political not Metaphysical, w: tenże, Collected Papers, red. S. Freeman, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, s. 388–414.
Rawls J. (2005), Political Liberalism. Expanded Edition, New York: Columbia University Press.
Sandel M. (2004), Republika proceduralna i nieuwarunkowana jaźń, przeł. P. Rymarczyk, w: P. Śpiewak (red.), Komunitarianie. Wybór tekstów, Warszawa: Fundacja Aletheia, s. 71–90.
Sandel M. (2009), Liberalizm a granice sprawiedliwości, przeł. A. Grobler, Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Akademickie i Profesjonalne.
Singer P., de Lazari‑Radek K. (2013), Konsekwencjalizm a tajemnica: obrona ezoterycznej moralności, „Analiza i Egzystencja” 22, s. 5–32.
Szutta A. (2010), Cnota rozsądności, w: N. Szutta (red.), Współczesna etyka cnót: możliwości i ograniczenia, Warszawa: Semper, s. 195–204.
Szutta A. (2013), Metoda refleksyjnej równowagi. Część I: prezentacja metody, „Diametros” 37, s. 129–149.
Szutta A. (2015), W poszukiwaniu zasad sprawiedliwości, „Filozofuj!” 5, s. 29–30.
Szutta A. (2018), Intuicje moralne. O poznaniu dobra i zła, Lublin: Academicon.
Śpiewak P. (red.) (2004), Komunitarianie. Wybór tekstów, Warszawa: Fundacja Aletheia.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Artur Szutta
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Uniwersytet Gdański, ul. J. Bażyńskiego 4, 80‑309 Gdańsk
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

In his A Theory of Justice John Rawls presents a critique of utilitarianism. He focuses on utilitarianism in the version offered by John Stuart Mill, but Rawls’s analysis of Mill’s views is schematic and limited to Mill’s ethical theory. Rawls does not recognize the importance of perfectionistic themes in Mill’s theory, nor does he note the consequences of that issue for the problem of gender equality. Rawls discuses those themes in his Lectures on the History of Political Philosophy. If one is primarily guided by Rawls’s A Theory of Justice, however, the person will be unable to appreciate similarities between Rawls’s and Mill’s positions. When focusing on the Lectures it is possible to recognize these affinities that are only dimly insinuated in A Theory of Justice. In the later volume they are strong enough to support the claim that a more pronounced affinity may bind these two authors that are not obvious at the first glance. I proceed therefore (1) to expose some shortcomings in the presentation of Mill’s utilitarianism by Rawls; (2) go on to analyse Lectures on the History of Political Philosophy in order to present a more penetrating reading of Mill’s utilitarianism by including its perfectionistic content; and (3) finally on the basis of those claims I point to some practical consequences of Mill’s and Rawls’s views on gender equality.
Go to article

Bibliography

Barker Ch. (2015), JS Mill on Nineteenth Century Marriage and the Common Law, „Law, Culture, and Humanities” 15 (1), s. 1–21.
Bentham J. (1838), The Works of Jeremy Bentham, red. J. Bowring, London: Longman.
Donner W. (2005), John Stuart Mill’s Liberal Feminism, w: M.H. Morales (red.), Mill’s „The Subjection of Women”: Critical Essays, Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, s. 1–12.
Hurka T. (1993), Perfectionism, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Mill J.S. (1963–1991), Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, red. J. Robson, 33 tomy, Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Mill J.S. (1995), O rządzie reprezentatywnym. Poddaństwo kobiet, przeł. G. Czernicki, M. Chyżyńska, Kraków: Znak.
Mill J.S. (2005), Utylitaryzm. O wolności, przeł. A. Kurlandzka, M. Ossowska, Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
Rawls J. (2009), Teoria sprawiedliwości. Wydanie nowe, przeł. M. Panufik, J. Pasek, A. Romaniuk, S. Szymański, Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
Rawls J. (2010), Wykłady z historii filozofii polityki, przeł. S. Szymański, Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Akademickie i Profesjonalne.
Tong R.P. (2002), Myśl feministyczna. Wprowadzenie, przeł. J. Mikos, B. Umińska, Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Elżbieta Filipow
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Uniwersytet Warszawski, Wydział Filozofii, ul. Krakowskie Przedmieście 3, 00‑927 Warszawa
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The paper attempts to place John Rawls’s social theory in an ontological frame of ideas. Józef M. Bocheński’s theory of systems was chosen to describe social reality without prejudging its role in the adequate theory. By adopting this approach the author presents several issues one by one: the characteristics of political philosophy and its relation to the ontology of social reality, Bocheński’s systems theory, the analysis of the industrial enterprise as a model example of a heterogeneous, dynamic and organic system, and Rawls’s structure of society. All this is done in terms of systems theory. The resulting outcome provides, among other things, a formal definition of Rawls’s basic social structure expressed in the language of systems theory, and it supports the thesis that the synthetic entity responsible for social functioning, such as the state, is correlated with the principles of justice as proposed by Rawls.
Go to article

Bibliography

Bertalanffy L. (1984), Ogólna teoria systemów. Podstawy, rozwój, zastosowania, przeł. E. Woydyłło‑Woźniak, Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.
Bocheński J.M. (1986), The Concept of the Free Society, „The Monist” 69 (2), s. 207– 215.
Bocheński J.M. (1993), Przyczynek do filozofii przedsiębiorstwa przemysłowego, przeł. J. Garewicz, w: J.M. Bocheński, Logika i filozofia, red. J. Parys, Biblioteka Współczesnych Filozofów, Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
Bunge M. (1979), Treatise on Basic Philosophy, vol. 4: Ontology II: A World of Systems, Dordrecht – Boston – London: D. Reidel Publishing Company.
Ingarden R. (1972), Książeczka o człowieku, Kraków: Wydawnictwo Literackie.
Ingarden R. (1974), Wstęp do fenomenologii Husserla, przeł. A. Półtawski, Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.
Ingarden R. (1987), Spór o istnienie świata, t. I, t. II, cz. 1 i 2, wyd. III, Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.
Kaczmarek J. (2008), Indywidua. Idee. Pojęcia. Badania z zakresu ontologii sformalizowanej, Łódź: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego.
Kaczmarek J. (2016), Atom ontologiczny: atom substancji, „Przegląd Filozoficzny – Nowa Seria” 4 (100), s. 109–124.
Rawls J. (1971), A Theory of Justice, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Rawls J. (1993), Political Liberalism, New York: Columbia University Press.
Rawls J. (1999), The Law of Peoples, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Rawls J. (2001), Justice as Fairness: A Restatement, red. E. Kelly, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Stróżewski W. (2003), Ontologia, Kraków: Znak – Aureus.
Wenar L. (2021), John Rawls, w: E.N. Zalta (red.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Summer 2021 Edition, https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2021/entries/rawls/.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Janusz Kaczmarek
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Uniwersytet Łódzki, Instytut Filozofii, ul. Lindleya 3/5, 90-131 Łódź

This page uses 'cookies'. Learn more