Sprawiedliwość społeczna jako równość szans w postaci egalitaryzmu trafu

IF 0.1 Q4 LAW Przeglad Sejmowy Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.31268/ps.2022.129
Andrzej Stoiński
{"title":"Sprawiedliwość społeczna jako równość szans w postaci egalitaryzmu trafu","authors":"Andrzej Stoiński","doi":"10.31268/ps.2022.129","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Article 2 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland invokes the idea of social justice without specifying its understanding. The present analysis deals with the problems of characterising it as equality of opportunities (possibilities) in the form of luck egalitarianism. Based on hypothetical examples, we have attempted to show that the social justice, which consists in the enforcement of equal rights, whether they are maximalist or merely positive, faces serious theoretical obstacles. The article contains three main theses. The first thesis is that it is impossible to enforce equal rights in maximalist terms. The second thesis states that the luck egalitarian project of equalizing opportunities for the younger generation by redistributing resources seized through the liquidation of inheritances shows the incoherence of the rules of justice. The third thesis is that luck egalitarianism violates the principle of consistency. For the above reasons, such an understanding of social justice as equality of opportunity in the form of luck egalitarianism should be excluded from the interpretation of Article 2 of the Polish Constitution.","PeriodicalId":42093,"journal":{"name":"Przeglad Sejmowy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Przeglad Sejmowy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31268/ps.2022.129","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Article 2 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland invokes the idea of social justice without specifying its understanding. The present analysis deals with the problems of characterising it as equality of opportunities (possibilities) in the form of luck egalitarianism. Based on hypothetical examples, we have attempted to show that the social justice, which consists in the enforcement of equal rights, whether they are maximalist or merely positive, faces serious theoretical obstacles. The article contains three main theses. The first thesis is that it is impossible to enforce equal rights in maximalist terms. The second thesis states that the luck egalitarian project of equalizing opportunities for the younger generation by redistributing resources seized through the liquidation of inheritances shows the incoherence of the rules of justice. The third thesis is that luck egalitarianism violates the principle of consistency. For the above reasons, such an understanding of social justice as equality of opportunity in the form of luck egalitarianism should be excluded from the interpretation of Article 2 of the Polish Constitution.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
机会平等主义形式的平等机会社会正义
波兰共和国《宪法》第2条援引了社会正义的概念,但没有具体说明其理解。目前的分析处理的问题是将其定性为运气平均主义形式的机会(可能性)平等。基于假设的例子,我们试图表明,社会正义,即执行平等权利,无论这些权利是最大限度的还是仅仅是积极的,都面临着严重的理论障碍。这篇文章包含三个主要论点。第一个论点是,在最大化的条件下执行平等权利是不可能的。第二篇论文指出,通过清算遗产来重新分配资源,从而为年轻一代提供平等机会的运气平等主义计划显示了正义规则的不连贯性。第三个论点是运气平均主义违背了一致性原则。基于上述原因,在对波兰宪法第2条的解释中,不应将这种将社会正义理解为运气平均主义形式的机会平等。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
39
期刊最新文献
Nowa Zelandia: Wyrok Sądu Najwyższego z dnia 21 listopada 2022 r. w sprawie Make It 16 Incorporated vs. Attorney-General (dotyczący wieku uprawniającego do głosowania w wyborach), sygn. akt SC 14/2022 Dopuszczalność odwołania od uchwał Krajowej Rady Sądownictwa w sprawach przeniesienia sędziego do innego wydziału Posłanka Wanda Ładzina (1880–1966) i jej działalność w Polsce i we Francji Uczestnictwo Sejmu i Senatu w procedurze kontroli przestrzegania zasady subsydiarności a przyszłość parlamentów narodowych w procesach decyzyjnych Unii Europejskiej Uzasadnienie orzeczeń sądowych – wybrane problemy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1