Justice as Fairness

Çağdaş siyaset teorisinde John Rawls'ın idealize ettiği adalet fikrinin yarattığı eleştirel ortam çok geniş ve takibi zor bir literatürün önünü açmıştır. Adalet kavramını merkezine alan çalışmaların işgal ettiği alan ve bu tartışmalardaki çeşitlilik göz önüne alındığında adalete ilişkin çalışmaların sürekliliğini takip etmenin oldukça zor olduğu söylenebilir. Bu nedenle, tartışmaları daha anlamlı hale getirebilmek için dönemsel bir sınıflandırmanın yanı sıra tematik birtakım eğilimleri de göz önüne almak gerekmektedir. Bu tespit üzere çalışma normatif anlamda adaletin çağdaş dönemde hangi bağlam ve temalar çerçevesinde açıklanabileceği sorusuna odaklanır ve bunu sorunsallaştırır. Adalete ilişkin dönemsel ve bağlamsal farklılıkların üzerine bir sorgulama yaparken benzer ve muarız düşüncelerin izleklerini takip etmeye çalışır. Adalete ilişkin anlatıların arka planında eşitlik-farklılık geriliminin önemli bir rol oynadığını, bu anlamda bir tarafta adaletin eşit muamele fikriyle anlam kazandığı düşüncesinin, diğer tarafta ise eşitlikten ziyade farklılıkların dikkate alındığı bir eğilimin olduğunu iddia eder. "Adalet-Farklılık İlişkisi" olarak adlandırdığımız bu durum, adalete ilişkin süregelen tartışmaların birey, grup, yetenek, işlev, topluluk, cinsiyet, çevre, kültür, kimlik vb. farklılıklar veya çeşitliliklerin vurgulandığı bir temada ele alındığı iddiasını taşır. Bu anlamda çalışma "hakkaniyet olarak adalet, yetkilenme teorisi, kapasite yaklaşımı, adalete dair feminist ilgiler, toplulukçu eğilim, temsil ve tanınmaya" dayanan geniş bir düzlemde adaletin farklılık bağlamında anlam kazanacağını iddia eder. İlgili çalışma ve yaklaşımlardan hareketle adalet tartışmalarına dair tasnif ve çeşitlilik problemini aşmayı sağlayacak bir bakış açısının imkanları üzerine bir sorgulama yaparak, bu denli bir sorgulamanın farklılık ekseninde düşünülmesinin gerekliliğine dikkat çeker.


The critical environment created by the justice idea in contemporary political theory idealized by John Rawls has paved the way for a very wide and of course challenging literature. Considering the area occupied by studies focusing on the concept of justice and the diversity of these debates, it can be claimed that following the continuity of the studies on justice is very difficult. Therefore, in order to make discussions more meaningful it is necessary to take into consideration not only a periodical classification but also thematic tendencies. Based on this, the current study focuses on the question of around what contexts and themes the justice in normative sense might be defined in the contemporary era and problematizes it. While questioning periodical and contextual differences related to justice, the study tries to follow the paths of similar and opponent thoughts. It claims that the equality-difference tension plays an important role in the background of the accounts of the justice, and in this regard, it claims that there is the idea of the justice becoming meaningful by the principle of equal treatment on the one hand and there is the tendency to consider differences apart from equality on the other hand. This situation which we call the "Justice-Difference Relationship" contains the claim that the ongoing debates on the subject of justice is considered within a theme where differences or diversities such as individual, group, ability, function, community, gender, environment, culture, and identity. In this regard, the study claims that justice would become meaningful in the context of differences on a broad level based on "justice as fairness, entitlement theory, capability approach, feminist interests on justice, communitarian tendency, representation and recognition". It inquires on the possibilities of a viewpoint that will overcome the problem of classification and diversity in relation to debates on justice with reference to the relevant works and approaches and draws attention to the necessity of considering such an inquiry on the axis of difference.

Wilfried Hinsch Verfahrensgerechtigkeit Ein Verfahren legt eine regelgeleitete Abfolge von Ereignissen oder Handlungen fest. Verfahren werden durchgeführt, um Ergebnisse mit gewissen Eigenschaften hervorzubringen und die Befolgung der für ein Verfahren wesentlichen Regeln soll sicherstellen oder zumindest wahrscheinlich machen, dass die Verfahrensergebnisse die gewünschten Eigenschaften tatsächlich haben. So führt die Befolgung der logischen Regeln mathematischer Beweisverfahren zu ‚wahren' mathematischen Aussagen und medizinische Therapieverfahren beruhen auf Regeln, die es wahrscheinlich sein lassen, dass mit ihrer Hilfe behandelte Patienten geheilt werden. Im sozialen Leben spielen Verfahren eine wichtige Rolle, wenn es darum geht, zu verbindlichen Entscheidungen und Regelungen zu kommen, und in der Regel wird der Gerechtigkeit oder Fairness von Verfahren wie auch ihrer Ergebnisse eine große Bedeutung beigemessen. Man denke an politische Wahlen, Abstimmungen im Parlament oder Gerichtsprozesse. In der Politischen Philosophie und der Ethik bezieht sich der Ausdruck "Verfahrensgerechtigkeit" (procedural justice) sowohl auf die Gerechtigkeit von Verfahren als auch auf die Gerechtigkeit der Ergebnisse von Verfahren, wobei angenommen wird, dass die Gerechtigkeit der Ergebnisse aus der Gerechtigkeit der Verfahren resultiert. In der Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie bezeichnet "Verfahrensgerechtigkeit" überdies die Eigenschaft eines Verfahrens bei Beteiligten und Dritten die Überzeugung hervorzurufen, die durch das Verfahren zustande gekommenen Ergebnisse seien gerecht und akzeptabel. Ethik und Politische Philosophie erörtern, was tatsächlich gerecht ist, die empirischen Sozialwissenschaften erforschen dagegen, was als gerecht wahrgenommen wird (perceived justice), zum Beispiel weil es das Ergebnis eines Verfahrens ist. Die Frage, ob es tatsächlich gerecht ist, bleibt offen. Dieser Artikel handelt von der Verfahrensgerechtigkeit als Gegenstand der Politischen Philosophie und der Ethik. (Vgl. zur Verfahrensgerechtigkeit in den Sozialwissenschaften Lind/Tyler 1988, Tyler 1990 u. 2005 und die dort angegebene Literatur.)

Atualmente, existem dois modelos distintos e antagônicos para as negociações dos direitos de transmissão televisiva e a distribuição dos recursos advindos destas vendas entre os principais campeonatos nacionais de futebol da Europa e o Campeonato Brasileiro. De um lado, há os exemplos de ligas que decidiram negociar de modo coletivo e adotar um modelo igualitário na divisão dos recursos, como é o caso da Premier League (Inglaterra), Bundesliga (Alemanha) e Ligue 1 (França). Mais recentemente, Serie A (Itália) e La Liga (Espanha) seguiram o mesmo modelo. Em ambos os casos, entretanto, foram necessárias intervenções dos respectivos governos nacionais (Estado) para que se implementasse um modelo coletivo de negociação e se regulamentasse uma divisão que buscasse a preservação da isonomia competitiva através de uma distribuição mais equânime. No Brasil, até 2011, os direitos de transmissão televisiva do Campeonato Brasileiro eram negociados pelo Clube dos Treze, uma entidade privada, que concentrava os recursos sob os interesses de seus associados. Situação que criava, então, um pequeno e privilegiado grupo de elite (um “clube de ricos”, como diria Noam Chomsky). Situação que gerava brutal desigualdade. Fazendo surgir o que Leite Júnior definiu como “apartheid futebolístico”. Entretanto, após o imbróglio envolvendo as negociações dos contratos referentes ao período de 2012-2014, o Clube dos Treze viu parte de seus associados boicotarem a negociação coletiva imposta pelo Conselho Administrativo de Defesa Econômica (CADE), uma vez que Globo e C13 haviam firmado acordo (Termo de Compromisso de Cessação - TCC) para que fosse encerrada uma investigação por formação de cartel, referente a contrato de 1997-1999. Os clubes partiram, então, para negociações individuais com a Rede Globo – modelo que tende a concentrar o poder nas mãos de poucos clubes, no caso brasileiro, com maior ênfase, em Flamengo e Corinthians. O modelo de negociação individual também é adotado no futebol português. A experiência portuguesa tem demonstrado – como nos últimos contratos celebrados por Benfica, Porto e Sporting – que este modelo tende a aprofundar as desigualdades entre os clubes. A partir destes estudos comparados e tendo como base referências teóricas que fundamentam o Estado Democrático de Direito e a garantia da equidade, “Cotas de televisão do Campeonato Brasileiro” busca compreender qual dos modelos de negociação das vendas dos direitos de transmissão e distribuição dos recursos se aproxima mais dos ideais da Isonomia, princípio basilar do sistema democrático, e da “justiça como equidade” como preconizada por John Rawls. O material deste livro serviu de base para a fundamentação e justificação dos projetos de lei 7681/14 e 755/15, que objetivavam regulamentar a questão dos direitos de TV no futebol brasileiro.

Justice has been the topic of comparatively few papers in the fields of applied linguistics or language assessment. This may be due to the lack of a clear and agreed-upon definition on the one hand, or to the difficulty of operational-izing justice for test development on the other. This paper aims to remedy both problems by discussing prior conceptualizations of justice and by introducing six justice principles, which are based on theories of distributive justice that focus on human rights, fairness, equal opportunity, and dignity. The overarching aim of this paper is to advance the debate on justice, and to provide a consistent way of considering ethical and moral dilemmas that language testers face today.

This dissertation is a critical analysis of John Rawls’s theory of justice in its historical and philosophical context. To that end, his works from A Theory of Justice (1971) to Justice as Fairness: A Restatement (2001) are examined. Not only Rawls’s theory of justice but also his approach to metaphysics and metaethics are also tackled to understand justice as fairness deeply. While setting out Rawls’s main arguments and theses, a critical approach is adopted with his foremost critics. This study thus searches for answers to the questions such as whether Rawls’s theory is workable, what does he precisely defends, what does he aim at with justice as fairness, and whether it is consistent or not. Unfortunately, it is seen that Rawls fails to propose a coherent egalitarian as well as liberal theory of justice. Hence, he could not reconcile the ideas of freedom and equality.

This paper uses and adapts John Rawls’ writings on justice in order to argue that past injustice can change what publicly counts as justice today. This differs from forward-looking approaches based on alleviating prospective disadvantage and backwards-looking historical entitlement approaches. In different contexts, Rawls’ own concern for what he calls the ‘social bases of self-respect’ may require the public endorsement of different principles of justice or a different specification of justice. Rawls’ difference principle focuses on the worst-off group defined in terms of class. A historicized difference principle is concerned with the relative standing of racial, gender, and other historically stigmatized groups. This assures group members that they receive fair treatment. It disincentivizes attempts to manipulate justice to a group’s advantage. Similarly, Rawls thinks providing one package of basic liberties to all citizens signals respect. However, indigenous peoples have often been forcibly coerced into being individual citizens. Given this history of disrespect, signaling respect could require recognizing indigenous self-government rights. Assurance requires respecting indigenous peoples as peoples, as in Rawls’ law of peoples, and disincentivizing attempts to make them into mere citizens. What counts as justice can change through past injustice, guided by forward-looking considerations of self-respect and public assurance.

This is the penultimate version of a piece that was published as: Timothy Waligore, "Rawls, Self-Respect, and Assurance: How Past Injustice Changes What Publicly Counts as Justice," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, Vol. 15, No. 1 (2016): 42-66. An earlier, slightly longer version of this piece is elsewhere on this webpage.

In this paper, I discuss the relevance of the sense of justice for Rawls's theory of justice. In the first part, I analyse the interpretation that Rawls offered of moral psychology for evaluating its role in the generation of the sense of justice and the acceptance of the principles of Justice. In the second part, I discuss the difficulties of accepting Rawls's proposal. Finally, I conclude that the research on moral psychology developed by Rawls allows him to recognise a way of supporting his principles of justice that is different from the traditional forms of deductive justification.

The first principle of Rawls's conception of justice secures a set of 'basic liberties' equally for all citizens within the constitutional structure of society. The 'worth' of citizens' liberties, however, may vary depending upon their wealth. Against Rawls, G.A. Cohen contends that an absence of money often can directly constrain citizens' freedom, and not simply its worth. This is because money often can remove legally enforced constraints on what citizens can do. Cohen's argument – if modified to apply to citizens' 'moral powers' rather than 'negative liberty' – threatens a core feature of Rawls's conception of justice, as it is unclear why the parties within the 'original position' would endorse the lexical priority of the first principle over the 'difference principle' (which concerns the distribution of wealth) if both principles similarly shape citizens' freedom. I concede Cohen's point regarding the relation between freedom and money, but argue that it is not fatal to Rawls's conception of justice if the 'basic needs principle' is understood to enjoy lexical priority over the first principle, and is modified to include a right to adequate discretionary time. Nonetheless, Cohen's argument helpfully highlights the infelicitous nature of Rawls's terminology with respect to liberty: the basic needs principle, the first principle, and the difference principle all should be understood as shaping citizens' freedom to exercise their moral powers.

Organizational justice gained a bourgeoning interest in academic and corporate areas, it is a virtue of social organizations. In the working environment, individuals react depending on their perceptions. Therefore, perceived organizational justice is a behavioral concept that refers to the subjective description of the fairness of remuneration, decision-making processes and relationships within the organization. These justice perceptions have been empirically related to positive and negative consequences on attitudes, behaviors, and health such as greater identification and commitment, better organizational trust, increased job satisfaction, reinforced job performance, promoted employees’ organizational citizenship behavior, improved health and wellbeing as well as counterproductive behaviors. Despite the vigor of fairness research, the rapid flourishment of this literature has made relevant a variety of new issues. Hence, drawing upon equity theory and social exchange theory, this ...

Este trabalho tem por objetivo geral analisar o fenômeno da judicialização das políticas públicas de saúde no Brasil, e por objetivo particular refletir sobre a legitimidade das decisões judiciais que concedem medicamentos de alto custo para indivíduos. A problemática levantada em torno destes objetivos dirige-se à seguinte questão: de que maneira tais decisões podem ser consideradas como mecanismos legítimos de justiça distributiva, considerando os aspectos jurídicos, filosóficos e políticos da legitimidade de tal circunstância? A presente pesquisa sustenta a hipótese de que as três dimensões examinadas oferecem pressupostos que são capazes de demonstrar a justeza do ato redistributivo que ocorre por meio dessas decisões. Assim, trata-se de uma investigação eminentemente teórica, de traço argumentativo, pois que busca contrastar os posicionamentos existentes sobre o tema na dogmática jurídica constitucional, na filosofia política, na jurisprudência do Supremo Tribunal Federal, com especial atenção para os votos até então proferidos no julgamento dos Recursos Extraordinários n.º 566.471/RN e 657.718/MG. Como resultado, após articular as categorias do Rule of Law, igualdade de oportunidades e solidariedade cooperativa na perspectiva do direito à saúde, a pesquisa se consolida no sentido de afirmar a justiça presente na prática redistributiva de acesso às políticas públicas de saúde pela via judicial.

The first principle of Rawls’s conception of justice secures a set of ‘basic liberties’ equally for all citizens within the constitutional structure of society. The ‘worth’ of citizens’ liberties, however, may vary depending upon their wealth. Against Rawls, Cohen contends that an absence of money often can directly constrain citizens’ freedom and not simply its worth. This is because money often can remove legally enforced constraints on what citizens can do. Cohen’s argument – if modified to apply to citizens’ ‘moral powers’ rather than ‘negative liberty’ – threatens a core feature of Rawls’s conception of justice, as it is unclear why the parties within the ‘original position’ would endorse the lexical priority of the first principle over the ‘difference principle’ (which concerns the distribution of wealth) if both principles similarly shape citizens’ freedom. I concede Cohen’s point regarding the relation between freedom and money but argue that it is not fatal to Rawls’s conce...

TCP is one of the main protocols that govern the Internet traffic nowadays. However, it suffers significant performance degradation over wireless links. Since wireless networks are leading the communication technologies recently, it is imperative to introduce effective solutions for the TCP congestion control mechanisms over such networks. In this research four End-to-End TCP implementations are discussed, they are TCP Westwood, Hybla, Highspeed, and NewReno. The performance of these variants is compared using LTE emulated environment in terms of throughput, delay, and fairness. Ns-3 simulator is used to simulate the LTE networks environment. The simulation results showed that TCP Highspeed achieves the best throughput results. Although TCP Westwood recorded the lowest latency values comparing to others, it behaved unfairly among different traffic flows. Moreover, TCP Hybla demonstrated the best fairness behaviour among other TCP variants.

Résumé

Cet article explore les conséquences pour le libéralisme politique de considérer l’existence d’un pluralisme raisonnable au sujet des différentes conceptions du juste. Comment une conception publique de la justice peut se développer malgré un désaccord raisonnable et profond sur les termes mêmes de cette justice ? En comparant le libertarisme, la justice comme équité et l’égalitarisme strict, il sera montré que les concepts fondamentaux de ces conceptions du juste sont essentiellement contestés. En guise de solution, deux conditions seront suggérées afin de faire en sorte que la conception publique de la justice en soit une de tolérance politique : premièrement, elle devra se baser sur une liste de droits minimaux reconnus par les différentes conceptions raisonnables du juste; et deuxièmement, si la conception publique de la justice a pour ambition de se développer au-delà du dénominateur commun, elle devra offrir des mesures compensatoires à ceux supportant des conceptions du juste plus restrictives. À certains égards, cette problématique et ces accommodements s’apparentent à ce qui est déjà proposé au sujet de multiculturalisme.

Abstract

This paper explores the implications for political liberalism of acknowledging that there is a reasonable disagreement among competing conceptions of justice. How can a public conception of justice be designed while still respecting the views of those who strongly disagree with it ? By confronting libertarianism, justice as fairness, and strict egalitarianism, it will be claimed that the core concepts of theses theories are essentially contested. As a solution, two conditions will be suggested in order for the public conception of justice to be one of political toleration: first, it ought to be based on shared agreements with regards to minimal rights; secondly, if it wishes to go beyond that minimal baseline, those who support more restrictive conceptions should receive some compensation. In some aspects, this issue and its accommodations resemble the ones faced in the multicultural contexts.

Introduction

Researchers agree that procedural justice and distributive justice interact so that high procedural fairness reduces the negative consequences of distributive unfairness.
Objectives

Our objective was to test the hypothesis that employees in Pakistan (i.e., an underdeveloped economy) would be more focused on rewards than procedures. Therefore, procedural and distributive justice will not interact in predicting employee behaviors.
Methods

Using independent measures for organizational justice and job outcomes, we conducted two field surveys (n = 372 and n = 550 paired responses) in Pakistan to examine the direct and combined effects of procedural and distributive justice on job performance, citizenship behaviors, and creativity.
Results

In both studies, the results suggest that distributive justice is a more consistent and relatively stronger predictor of job outcomes as compared to procedural justice. The results also showed that procedural justice did not moderate the relationship between distributive justice and employee behaviors.
Conclusion

The findings suggest that workers in an underdeveloped economy like Pakistan may be more concerned with fairness in the distribution of rewards than procedural fairness. Therefore, in such context, procedures may be less likely to reduce negative consequences of unfair reward distribution.

Resumo: O texto discute as ideias de bem a partir do desenvolvimento da concepção política de justiça elaborada por John Rawls. Essa ideia desempenha uma função basilar na teoria liberal da justiça como equidade. Uma objeção comum à tese liberal caracterizada pela prioridade do justo sobre o bem é a de não levar em consideração o contexto de sociedades pluralistas democráticas contemporâneas ao tentar justificar uma concepção política independente das ideias do bem. No entanto, argumenta-se com a intenção de mostrar como Rawls admitiu abertamente que sua teoria da justiça não está motivada independente de alguma concepção de bem. Se a teoria liberal da justiça como equidade, por um lado, defende a prioridade do justo, por outro lado, não deixa de fazer uso de ideias de bem. Embora o bem seja uma característica comum de teorias teleológicas, essa ideia não se sobrepõe a concepção deontológica da teoria rawlsiana. A teoria da justiça como equidade aceita ideias de bem desde que seja alguma concepção de bem político. Chama a atenção de que para Rawls toda concepção de justiça deve combinar a ideia de justiça e as ideias de bem, pois são congruentes. Palavras-chave: Justiça, Equidade, Congruência, Ideias de Bem, Concepção política.

LESSA, J. B.. As Ideias de Bem na Justiça como Equidade de John Rawls. In: XII Semana Acadêmica do PPG em Filosofia da PUCRS, 2013, Porto Alegre. XII Semana Acadêmica do PPG em Filosofia da PUCRS, 2013.

Interest in the nature and importance of 'childhood goods' recently has emerged within philosophy. Childhood goods, roughly, are things (including kinds of activities) that are good for persons qua children independent of any contribution to the good of persons qua adults (although they may also be valuable in this way). According to Colin Macleod, John Rawls's political conception of justice as fairness rests upon an adult-centered 'agency assumption' and thus is incapable of incorporating childhood goods into its content. Macleod concludes that because of this, justice as fairness cannot be regarded as a complete conception of distributive justice. In this paper I provide a political liberal response to Macleod's argument by advancing three claims. First, I propose that political liberalism should treat leisure time as a distinct 'primary good.' Second, I suggest that leisure time should be distributed via (a) the 'basic needs principle' and (b) the 'difference principle' for all citizens over the course of their complete lives, including their childhoods. Third, the provision of leisure time in this way supports the realization of childhood goods for citizens.

Organizational justice gained a bourgeoning interest in academic and corporate areas, it is a virtue of social organizations. In the working environment, individuals react depending on their perceptions. Therefore, perceived organizational justice is a behavioral concept that refers to the subjective description of the fairness of remuneration, decision-making processes and relationships within the organization. These justice perceptions have been empirically related to positive and negative consequences on attitudes, behaviors, and health such as greater identification and commitment, better organizational trust, increased job satisfaction, reinforced job performance, promoted employees' organizational citizenship behavior, improved health and wellbeing as well as counterproductive behaviors. Despite the vigor of fairness research, the rapid flourishment of this literature has made relevant a variety of new issues. Hence, drawing upon equity theory and social exchange theory, this theoretical paper is designed to investigate the prominent literature in order to develop a holistic overview portraying the individual level of the perceived organizational justice and point out its salient consequences, based on recent theoretical and empirical research. It is anticipated that this paper will have a significant contribution to the advancement of organizational justice research literature and provide managers and scholars to get a better insight into harmonizing the relationship between employee and employers. Since, organizational justice has the potential to produce powerful benefits for organizations and employees alike. In the present paper, we discuss the main definitions and dimensions of organizational justice in accordance with the descriptive and subjective approach, in addition, we present the principal outcomes of fairness and unfairness treatments.

In this article, I argue that Rawlsian liberal political institutions are incapable of ensuring that the basic needs of the worst off are met.  This argument consists of two steps.  First, I show that political institutions are incapable of ensuring that the basic needs of the worst off are met without pursuing certain non-market-based courses of action that are designed to alter the work choices of citizens.  Second, I argue that such courses of action are not available to Rawlsian liberal political institutions. It follows that justice as fairness, or any other Rawls-type political conception of justice, is actually parasitic on the willingness of citizens to be sufficiently moved by the relevant values and virtues that somewhat resemble the application of the difference principle to the lives of people, not just institutions.  In other words, Rawlsian liberalism is dependent upon the willingness of citizens to make career choices in much the same way as Cohen’s egalitarianism prescribes for them; however, in spite of this, it cannot require citizens to act in such a way.

G.A. Cohen has produced one of the most sharply focused examinations of John Rawls’s political philosophy. Cohen has pointed out that Rawlsian constructivism made the concept of justice depend on factual considerations, like those pertaining to the functioning of free market or those linked to features of human psychology. The same method is also the cause of merging justice with other values or social ideals, like efficiency or stability. One reason for these confusions is the preferred construction procedure, the idea of selecting the principle of justice in the original position. This idea sets unjustified constraints to the concept of justice. Cohen states that this procedure cannot offer fundamental normative principles about what justice requires but only rules of regulation for a liberal society. At the same time, Cohen anticipates the possibility of a factless constructivism. In this study I analyze this possibility and come to a conclusion which is different from what Cohen predicts that this version of constructivism will yield. A revised original position in line with the idea of removing facts from the normative theory of justice will not provide the convergence towards egalitarianism assumed by Cohen. I will argue that the revision a factless constructivism might propose can be justified if it better secures the impartiality of the debate. The principles chosen in the original position and each distribution resulted afterwards should not be affected by arbitrary factors from a moral point of view, such as aspects reflecting a kind of natural lottery. Principles of justice have to be more than a way to secure equal initial distributive shares. They should function as instruments that can mitigate arbitrary influences exerted upon future distributions as well.

Abstract. 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 sup-ports 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 reciproc-ity 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 health...

A navegação consulta e descarregamento dos títulos inseridos nas Bibliotecas Digitais UC Digitalis, UC Pombalina e UC Impactum, pressupõem a aceitação plena e sem reservas dos Termos e Condições de Uso destas Bibliotecas Digitais, disponíveis em https://digitalis.uc.pt/pt-pt/termos. Conforme exposto nos referidos Termos e Condições de Uso, o descarregamento de títulos de acesso restrito requer uma licença válida de autorização devendo o utilizador aceder ao(s) documento(s) a partir de um endereço de IP da instituição detentora da supramencionada licença. Ao utilizador é apenas permitido o descarregamento para uso pessoal, pelo que o emprego do(s) título(s) descarregado(s) para outro fim, designadamente comercial, carece de autorização do respetivo autor ou editor da obra. Na medida em que todas as obras da UC Digitalis se encontram protegidas pelo Código do Direito de Autor e Direitos Conexos e demais legislação aplicável, toda a cópia, parcial ou total, deste documento, nos casos em que é legalmente admitida, deverá conter ou fazer-se acompanhar por este aviso. O conceito de Lei, lei legítima e desobediência civil na teoria da justiça como equidade de John Rawls

El problema del régimen y la moral dentro del campo de las relaciones
recíprocas entre Venezuela y Estados Unidos (2001-2010), se plantea a través de la relectura del modelo de la justicia como equidad de John Rawls. Dicha reinterpretación nos permitirá dentro del campo del conocimiento histórico y de la filosofía política, modificar  conceptualmente los parámetros del autor y ampliar las perspectivas
de estudio de la política exterior en Venezuela, intentando profundizar en la carga axiológica de los gobiernos considerados en este caso, entes morales. Es decir, poseedores de la capacidad para el conseguir el bien y la justicia. Si bien, la relación planteada régimen-moral no parece tener más que una conexión fi losófi ca, veremos cómo la moral se convierte en el elemento que atribuye, moviliza y transforma la posibilidad
de un régimen político justo y bueno, tanto en política doméstica como externa.

Tomando en cuenta las diferencias —propias de la naturaleza humana— se estudia y analiza cómo los gobiernos de Venezuela y Estados Unidos, poseen en algunos casos similitudes en cuanto a las decisiones tomadas por ambos, pero argumentados el primero, en el socialismo y el segundo, en el liberalismo y en dónde el antiamericanismo
y el anticomunismo, permiten concebir y consolidar posturas políticas.

Many economists have argued convincingly that automated systems employing present-day artificial intelligence have already caused massive technological displacement, which has led to stagnant real wages, fewer middleincome jobs, and increased economic inequality in developed countries like Canada and the United States. To address this problem various individuals have proposed measures to increase workers' living standards, including the adoption of a universal basic income, increased public investment in education, increased minimum wages, increased worker control of firms, and investment in a Green New Deal that will provide substantial employment in transitioning to green energy, buildings, and agriculture. In this paper I argue that both left-wing and right-wing positions in political philosophy, such as John Rawls's Justice as Fairness and Robert Nozick's Entitlement Theory, are committed to the conclusion that we should take political action to counteract the effects of technological displacement by undertaking such measures to increase workers' living standards.

Organizational justice gained a bourgeoning interest in academic and corporate areas, it is a virtue of social
organizations. In the working environment, individuals react depending on their perceptions. Therefore, perceived
organizational justice is a behavioral concept that refers to the subjective description of the fairness of
remuneration, decision-making processes and relationships within the organization. These justice perceptions have
been empirically related to positive and negative consequences on attitudes, behaviors, and health such as greater
identification and commitment, better organizational trust, increased job satisfaction, reinforced job performance,
promoted employees’ organizational citizenship behavior, improved health and wellbeing as well as
counterproductive behaviors. Despite the vigor of fairness research, the rapid flourishment of this literature has
made relevant a variety of new issues. Hence, drawing upon equity theory and social exchange theory, this
theoretical paper is designed to investigate the prominent literature in order to develop a holistic overview
portraying the individual level of the perceived organizational justice and point out its salient consequences, based
on recent theoretical and empirical research.
It is anticipated that this paper will have a significant contribution to the advancement of organizational justice
research literature and provide managers and scholars to get a better insight into harmonizing the relationship
between employee and employers. Since, organizational justice has the potential to produce powerful benefits for
organizations and employees alike.
In the present paper, we discuss the main definitions and dimensions of organizational justice in accordance with
the descriptive and subjective approach, in addition, we present the principal outcomes of fairness and unfairness
treatments.

Palavras-chave: Desigualdade. Direitos políticos. Justiça. O presente trabalho tem como objetivo examinar a presença de uma debilidade na teoria da justiça de John Rawls, envolvendo a questão das desigualdades socioeconômicas e a prioridade entre os princípios de justiça, a partir das análises desenvolvidas por Thomas Scanlon. Como se sabe, a teoria de Rawls gira em torno de dois princípios de justiça. Segundo o que estabelecem esses princípios, a distribuição justa de recursos dentro de uma sociedade é aquele em que, em primeiro lugar todos os indivíduos gozam do mesmo conjunto de direitos e liberdades básicas e, em segundo lugar, as desigualdades socioeconômicas são aceitáveis apenas quando derivem de cargos e posições equitativamente acessíveis a todos e beneficiem os menos favorecidos, tendo o primeiro princípio prioridade sobre esse último. Em sua obra recente, contudo, Scanlon aponta que a existência de desigualdades na distribuição de recursos tem como um de seus efeitos a criação de uma diferença no poder de influência que cada pessoa tem na esfera política. Assim sendo, caberia indagar se aquelas desigualdades permitidas pela teoria de Rawls não poderiam ter como efeito prático a geração de tais diferenças no poder de influência dos membros da sociedade, de modo que o cumprimento do segundo princípio de justiça poderia comprometer a igualdade de direitos (incluindo os direitos políticos) que o primeiro princípio havia estabelecido. Assim, pretende-se sustentar a conclusão de que, se Scanlon tiver razão em seu diagnóstico e de fato há um vínculo entre distribuição desigual de recursos e desigual influência na tomada de decisões na política, a teoria de Rawls estaria vulnerável à objeção de que possibilitaria a violação da própria distribuição igualitária de direitos que se propõe a defender. O trabalho tem natureza bibliográfica. Baseia-se nos textos dos dois autores nos quais elaboram suas ideias e conceitos a respeito de problemática. Nesse caso, "Uma Teoria da Justiça", de Rawls e "Why Does Inequality Matter", de Scanlon. Utiliza-se, também, bibliografia secundária destinada a esclarecer as propostas dos dois autores. Para alcançar os objetivos colocados, nossa argumentação precisa seguir algumas etapas. Primeiro, delimitar qual é o papel da prioridade lexical entre os princípios de justiça de 1 Graduando em Direito do quarto período pela Universidade Federal do Pará.

A partir de la relectura del modelo teórico la justicia como equidad del filósofo John Rawls, intentamos estudiar y comparar la política exterior de los gobiernos de Venezuela y Estados Unidos, concebidos
estos como entes morales, capaces actuar desde y no solo en concordancia con los principios de justicia y de revisar y racionalmente perseguir una concepción del bien. En efecto, observaremos cómo
ambos gobiernos actúan racional o razonablemente dependiendo de sus particularidades históricas, a través de la relación entre el régimen político y la moral, siendo esta última la que nos permita estudiar la prioridad de lo justo sobre lo bueno, es decir, la concepción pública de justicia del modelo ralwsiano de la justicia como equidad.

Resumen: El objetivo de este trabajo es explicar el rechazo de John Rawls a la dicoto-mía público-privado, el cual no llegó a elucidar claramente a razón de su muerte. Sin embargo, en sus textos tardíos hay información suficiente para hacer una reconstrucción de este rechazo, a partir de sus concepciones de persona y ciudadano, junto a una antropología filosófica subyacente, como también desde lo que el autor explica de los dominios político/público y no políticos/no públicos y privados. En primer lugar se explicarán estas concepciones y dominios (por cuanto se encuentran dispersas en sus obras tardías), y en segundo lugar se procederá a explicar el rechazo.

Abstract: The objective of this paper is to explain John Rawls's rejection to the public-private dichotomy, which he did not come to clearly elucidate given to his death. However, in his latest works there is enough information to make a reconstruction of this rejection, starting from his conceptions of person and citizen, along with a subjacent philosophical anthropology, as well from what the author explains of the political/ public and non-political/non-public and private domains. First, this conceptions and domains will be explained (given the fact that they are scattered in his latest works). Second, the rejection will be explained.

Genetic enhancement represents an improvement of human abilities and talents, giving those who are thus enhanced a competitive advantage over others. If genetic enhancement technologies are privately funded and only a small group of wealthy people has access to them, their competitive advantage might be further increased, and the existing social, economic and political inequalities might be increased as well. I discuss Baccarini's regulation proposal according to which genetic enhancement can remain privately funded and (at least for some time) accessible only to a small group of people, provided that the benefits of their enhancement (e.g. increased productivity, better health care) are distributed is accordance with the lax difference principle (i.e. to the greatest reasonable advantage of the worst-off citizens). I have some doubts regarding this proposal. Namely, I argue that there are other more important principles (i.e. the principle of equal liberty and the principle of fair equality of opportunity) that have lexical priority over the difference principle, and offer several arguments supporting this claim. In the rest of the paper I argue that privately funded genetic enhancement, available only to a small number of wealthy citizens, can lead to the violation of both the principle of equal liberty and the principle of fair equality of opportunity. It should therefore be replaced with publicly funded genetic enhancement available to all citizens.

A dissertação trata das questões da divisão do trabalho e da democracia no local de trabalho a partir da teoria de justiça de John Rawls. Inicialmente, argumenta-se que um dos pontos da crítica marxista ao liberalismo, o que se refere ao problema do estranhamento, não pode ser desconsiderado por liberais como Rawls. Após, apontam-se caminhos para a superação desse problema.

Dissertação apresentada ao Programa de Pós-Graduação em Direito da Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG), como requisito parcial à obtenção do grau de mestre em direito.

Deliberative Negotiations behind the Veil of Ignorance (DNVI) is a procedure of negotiations between representatives on behalf of parties-and based on comprehensive parties' instructions-where all representatives receive instructions from all parties and where they do not know which party they actually represent. The goal is to subvert the situation of hard egocentric bargaining into a cooperative negotiations-where information on actual assets and needs are fully disclosed and where parties strive at least towards a fair compromise (with fair distribution of benefits and costs). DNVI is a simulation of the theoretical concept of omnipartiality-as opposed to impartiality-in governance for health (Zabdyr-Jamróz, 2015, in press). It can be applied in situations whenever institutionalised barraging is necessary, especially when professional mediation failed or was impossible to apply. It still functions in the role of bargaining-thus, it can operate within the pre-existing systemic arrangements without the need for more fundamental structural changes-but it facilitates more integrative solutions.

A notable feature of Rawls’ theory of international justice, which he presented in The Laws of Peoples, is his insistence on the toleration of non-liberal states provided that they are decent. Many political philosophers have criticized Rawls for being too generous towards non-liberal states. These critics feared that Rawls’ theory would safeguard non-liberal states to perform many forms of domestic injustices. In this paper, I make an entirely opposite objection. I claim that the real problem with Rawls’ theory of international justice is not of its being too generous, but rather of its being too stringent. Specifically, I will argue that when The Law of Peoples is correctly interpreted, it turns out that “the decent non-liberal societies” that the theory so emphatically proclaims to tolerate are not really non-liberal societies, but rather are more than sufficiently liberal societies.

Este texto tem por propósito discutir o que é um direito à educação a partir da teoria da justiça como equidade de Rawls. Para tanto, o mesmo é dividido em quatro partes: i) em primeiro lugar, discute-se o direito à educação no caso brasileiro, tendo em conta sua previsão constitucional; ii) segue-se avaliando o papel do Estado no pensamento de Rawls, bem como altercam-se as ideias de sociedade e bens primários, vistas como o pano de fundo da educação; iii) explana-se o direito à educação a partir de TJ, como expectativa legítima, e das modificações realizadas por Rawls à justiça como equidade, apresentando-o como parte do mínimo essencial e, portanto, como direito social constitucional; e, por fim, iv) explora-se o papel e a função da educação tal e qual a teoria de Rawls permite.

Download at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2713411

The past fifteen years have witnessed immense growth in the application of technology in the field of conflict resolution. One area of particular interest is the growth of the practice and study of Online Dispute Resolution (ODR), which has its roots in the worlds of technology and of Alternative Dispute Resolution. As the field of ODR develops, its terminology and conceptual frameworks require exploration and clarification, with special care taken to convey shared meaning between participants coming from the two contributing worlds noted above.

In this article, we introduce three conceptual areas – key concepts in ODR – that would benefit from such clarification: trust, fairness, and security. We discuss multiple connotations and uses of each term, and explain why developing a clearer understanding of each would benefit the ODR field.

En este trabajo se analiza si es apropiado evaluar acciones individuales con los principios de justicia aplicables a las instituciones. Para lograr este objetivo, el artículo examina la teoría de la justicia rawlsiana y algunas de las principales objeciones en su contra. Los críticos niegan que los principios de justicia de esta teoría estén configurados para evaluar exclusivamente las instituciones sociales básicas. Es más: afirman que la justicia no sólo exige instituciones justas sino que además exige acciones individuales justas. La hipótesis de este trabajo afirma que principios aptos para ciertos contextos sociales no son adecuados para evaluar otro tipo de interacciones sociales. El argumento apela a una interpretación normativa de la noción de estructura básica, elemento clave para defender el carácter institucional de la justicia rawlsiana.

... Abstract. La più giuridica delle virtù / M. Ricciardi. - In: Rivista di estetica. - ISSN 0035-6212. - 39:3(2008). - p. 215-224.. Si tratta di uno studio su alcuni aspetti della riflessione di HLA Hart sulla giustizia ei suoi rapporti col diritto. Details der Publikation. ...