Whose Public Reason? Which Justification of Laws? A Natural Law
Response

J 2021

Whose Public Reason? Which Justification of Laws? A Natural Law Response

BAROŠ, Jiří

Základní údaje

Originální název

Whose Public Reason? Which Justification of Laws? A Natural Law Response

Název česky

Čí veřejný rozum? Jaké ospravedlnění zákonů? Odpověď přirozeného práva

Autoři

BAROŠ, Jiří (203 Česká republika, garant, domácí)

Vydání

Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale, Paris, Presses Universitaires de France, 2021, 0035-1571

Další údaje

Jazyk

angličtina

Typ výsledku

Článek v odborném periodiku

Obor

60300 6.3 Philosophy, Ethics and Religion

Stát vydavatele

Francie

Utajení

není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství

Odkazy

URL

Kód RIV

RIV/00216224:14230/21:00119246

Organizační jednotka

Fakulta sociálních studií

DOI

http://dx.doi.org/10.3917/rmm.214.0507

UT WoS

000740975200006

Klíčová slova česky

liberalismus; neshoda; nová teorie přirozeného práva; perfekcionismus; politický liberalismus; přirozené právo; společné dobro; veřejné ospravedlnění; veřejný rozum

Klíčová slova anglicky

common good; disagreement; liberalism; new theory of natural law; perfectionism; political liberalism; natural law; public justification; public reason

Štítky

rivok

Příznaky

Mezinárodní význam, Recenzováno

Změněno: 14. 4. 2022 08:44, Mgr. Blanka Farkašová

Anotace

V originále

A persistent puzzle for practical philosophy centres on finding the appropriate path to justify the laws whose purpose is to regulate the functioning of constitutional democracies. Public reason liberals deny that this justification could come from comprehensive doctrines, since the laws must be justifiable to all (reasonable) citizens. The natural law tradition offers a useful test of the plausibility of this claim. This article illustrates how the two versions of public reason liberalism differ in their openness to natural law reasons, and why, given the influence of their disparate starting points on the normative standards by which they assess laws, natural law exponents have good reason to reject both.

Návaznosti

GA19-11091S, projekt VaV

Název: Jak dál s veřejným rozumem? Kritiky a obhajoby veřejného ospravedlnění podle liberalismu

Investor: Grantová agentura ČR, Jak dál s veřejným rozumem? Kritiky a obhajoby veřejného ospravedlnění podle liberalismu

Citovat

BAROŠ, Jiří. Whose Public Reason? Which Justification of Laws? A Natural Law Response. Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 2021, roč. 112, č. 4, s. 507-524. ISSN 0035-1571. Dostupné z: https://dx.doi.org/10.3917/rmm.214.0507.

@article{1795878,
   author = {Baroš, Jiří},
   article_location = {Paris},
   article_number = {4},
   doi = {http://dx.doi.org/10.3917/rmm.214.0507},
   keywords = {common good; disagreement; liberalism; new theory of natural law; perfectionism; political liberalism; natural law; public justification; public reason},
   language = {eng},
   issn = {0035-1571},
   journal = {Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale},
   title = {Whose Public Reason? Which Justification of Laws? A Natural Law Response},
   url = {https://www.cairn.info/revue-de-metaphysique-et-de-morale-2021-4-page-507.htm},
   volume = {112},
   year = {2021}
}

TY  - JOUR
ID  - 1795878
AU  - Baroš, Jiří
PY  - 2021
TI  - Whose Public Reason? Which Justification of Laws? A Natural Law Response
JF  - Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale
VL  - 112
IS  - 4
SP  - 507-524
EP  - 507-524
PB  - Presses Universitaires de France
SN  - 00351571
KW  - common good
KW  - disagreement
KW  - liberalism
KW  - new theory of natural law
KW  - perfectionism
KW  - political liberalism
KW  - natural law
KW  - public justification
KW  - public reason
UR  - https://www.cairn.info/revue-de-metaphysique-et-de-morale-2021-4-page-507.htm
N2  - A persistent puzzle for practical philosophy centres on finding the appropriate path to justify the laws whose purpose is to regulate the functioning of constitutional democracies. Public reason liberals deny that this justification could come from comprehensive doctrines, since the laws must be justifiable to all (reasonable) citizens. The natural law tradition offers a useful test of the plausibility of this claim. This article illustrates how the two versions of public reason liberalism differ in their openness to natural law reasons, and why, given the influence of their disparate starting points on the normative standards by which they assess laws, natural law exponents have good reason to reject both.
ER  -

BAROŠ, Jiří. Whose Public Reason? Which Justification of Laws? A Natural Law Response. \textit{Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale}. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 2021, roč.~112, č.~4, s.~507-524. ISSN~0035-1571. Dostupné z: https://dx.doi.org/10.3917/rmm.214.0507.

Podrobný výpis o publikaci