Suchergebnisse

The article discusses E. Frazer and N. Lacey's feminist project of the theory of justice. The project is being developed through a critique of formalist methodo­logy, characteristic of Kantian liberal theories of justice, and is based on the idea of a methodological synthesis of social and political theory. The possibi­lity of synthesis is revealed through a combination of interpretivist and ontological realist approaches to the issue of justice. Their main reproach to Kantian theories of justice is that they are ill-equipped to endogenize mechanisms of social exclusion and domi­nation, operating in society, which fails to distribute justice so that it may serve a well-being of each indi­vidual person.

The article discusses E. Frazer and N. Lacey's feminist project of the theory of justice. The project is being developed through a critique of formalist methodo­logy, characteristic of Kantian liberal theories of justice, and is based on the idea of a methodological synthesis of social and political theory. The possibi­lity of synthesis is revealed through a combination of interpretivist and ontological realist approaches to the issue of justice. Their main reproach to Kantian theories of justice is that they are ill-equipped to endogenize mechanisms of social exclusion and domi­nation, operating in society, which fails to distribute justice so that it may serve a well-being of each indi­vidual person.

The article discusses E. Frazer and N. Lacey's feminist project of the theory of justice. The project is being developed through a critique of formalist methodo­logy, characteristic of Kantian liberal theories of justice, and is based on the idea of a methodological synthesis of social and political theory. The possibi­lity of synthesis is revealed through a combination of interpretivist and ontological realist approaches to the issue of justice. Their main reproach to Kantian theories of justice is that they are ill-equipped to endogenize mechanisms of social exclusion and domi­nation, operating in society, which fails to distribute justice so that it may serve a well-being of each indi­vidual person.

A review essay on a book by Forrest D. Colburn, Latin America at the End of Politics (Princeton, NJ: Princeton U Press, 2002).

Author shows how the concept of the general will plays a central role in a certain type of liberal anti-totalitarian philosophy. Author confronts Talmon's & Berlin's criticism of the general will with Arendt's understanding of the French Revolution. Talmon & Berlin argue that the concept of the general will was responsible for the totalitarian character of the French Revolution. Author uses Arendt's comparison of the French & the American Revolution to ask a question: If the general will is intrinsically totalitarian does it mean that America is also totalitarian if one shows that for Madison & Hamilton the American constitution was the incarnation of the general will? 5 References. Adapted from the source document.