Epistemological Constraints on Consilience
In: Foundations of Neuroeconomic Analysis, S. 17-36
50736 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Foundations of Neuroeconomic Analysis, S. 17-36
Both electoral results and public opinion polls have long revealed what most observers have viewed as a paradox if not a contradiction. By significant majorities, the Japanese people appear to oppose any revision of article 9, but support the SDF and their deployment with legislative sanction. The seemingly antithetical aspects of these views can be reconciled if one accepts the proposition that the public is willing to allow an armed force but only within parameters that are still ill-defined. So long as article 9 remains, the government is constrained by the need for legislative approval and at least potential judicial objection. Thus, by gradual evolution, a consensus seems to have emerged allowing the maintenance of armed forces, but limiting their use to noncombat roles that also have explicit legislative approval.
BASE
SSRN
In: Democratization, Band 8, Heft 3, S. 26-50
ISSN: 1351-0347
In: The Structure of Liberty, S. 257-283
In: Leisure sciences: an interdisciplinary journal, Band 17, Heft 2, S. 109-120
ISSN: 1521-0588
In: SAIS review, Band 7, Heft 1, S. 81-93
World Affairs Online
In: Journal of economics and business, Band 34, Heft 1, S. 79-85
ISSN: 0148-6195
In: Policy studies journal: the journal of the Policy Studies Organization, Band 7, Heft 2, S. 208-213
ISSN: 1541-0072
In: Journalism quarterly, Band 53, Heft 1, S. 5-13
In: American behavioral scientist: ABS, Band 16, Heft 3, S. 342-342
ISSN: 1552-3381
Assuming that there is not terminological or conceptual impediment to call social and economic rights "human rights", this paper argues that social and economic human rights are normatively different from classical civil and political human rights, and that this may have some significant institutional implications. Following mainstream opinion, I presuppose that both classical liberal rights and socioeconomic human rights are bundles of negative and positive "incidents" (concrete rights). My first claim is that in both cases negative incidents can plausibly be constructed as "deontological constraints." That means that such constraints must be observed even if infringing them could maximize the satisfaction of the interests those rights seek to preserve. My second claim is that, contrary to classical human rights, the fulfillment of the negative incidents of socioeconomic rights, albeit necessary, does not represent a significant contribution to their fulfillment. Since in the case of socioeconomic human rights positive incidents play such crucial role, there is a relevant asymmetry between classical and socioeconomic human rights. The paper concludes by showing some institutional implications of this asymmetry.
BASE
SSRN
Working paper
In: NBER Working Paper No. w15498
SSRN
In: Social scientist: monthly journal of the Indian School of Social Sciences, Band 1, Heft 1, S. 12