从知识理论来看,“树篱”作为人类安全的支撑

IF 1.2 Q1 LAW Juridicas CUC Pub Date : 2018-11-07 DOI:10.17981/JURIDCUC.14.1.2018.11
Joaquín Ordóñez, Enrique Uribe Arzate, L. Ordoñez
{"title":"从知识理论来看,“树篱”作为人类安全的支撑","authors":"Joaquín Ordóñez, Enrique Uribe Arzate, L. Ordoñez","doi":"10.17981/JURIDCUC.14.1.2018.11","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper, the theory of the “prohibited limits” and the concept of “human security” are reviewed, and its main theoretical categories are analyzed in order to identify the existing relationship between both, as well as their differential and coincidental aspects. This review was made based on a documentary methodology from both an analytical and synthetic point of view. Theoretical aspects were considered to distinguish the close relationship between both categories, hence, allowing a better understanding of the social phenomenon of human insecurity. The findings show that there is a cognitive relationship between the properties of the prohibited limits and human security as objects of knowledge. In addition, the regularity in the relationshipsbetween each of these objects and their properties were acknowledged, leading to the categories of causality and substantiality. The foregoing allows proposing the theory of the prohibited limits as source and sustenance of human security. Keywords: prohibited limits, human security, theory of knowledge","PeriodicalId":40796,"journal":{"name":"Juridicas CUC","volume":"14 1","pages":"233-258"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2018-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"El “coto vedado” como sustento de la seguridad humana desde la teoría del conocimiento\",\"authors\":\"Joaquín Ordóñez, Enrique Uribe Arzate, L. Ordoñez\",\"doi\":\"10.17981/JURIDCUC.14.1.2018.11\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this paper, the theory of the “prohibited limits” and the concept of “human security” are reviewed, and its main theoretical categories are analyzed in order to identify the existing relationship between both, as well as their differential and coincidental aspects. This review was made based on a documentary methodology from both an analytical and synthetic point of view. Theoretical aspects were considered to distinguish the close relationship between both categories, hence, allowing a better understanding of the social phenomenon of human insecurity. The findings show that there is a cognitive relationship between the properties of the prohibited limits and human security as objects of knowledge. In addition, the regularity in the relationshipsbetween each of these objects and their properties were acknowledged, leading to the categories of causality and substantiality. The foregoing allows proposing the theory of the prohibited limits as source and sustenance of human security. Keywords: prohibited limits, human security, theory of knowledge\",\"PeriodicalId\":40796,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Juridicas CUC\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"233-258\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-11-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Juridicas CUC\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17981/JURIDCUC.14.1.2018.11\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Juridicas CUC","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17981/JURIDCUC.14.1.2018.11","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文对“禁止限度”理论和“人类安全”概念进行了回顾,并对其主要理论范畴进行了分析,以确定两者之间存在的关系,以及它们之间的差异和巧合方面。本综述是根据文献方法从分析和综合的角度进行的。理论方面的考虑是为了区分这两类之间的密切关系,从而使人们能够更好地了解人类不安全的社会现象。研究结果表明,禁区的属性与作为知识对象的人类安全之间存在认知关系。此外,认识到每一个对象及其性质之间的关系的规律性,从而得出因果性和实体性的范畴。上述情况允许提出将被禁止的限制作为人类安全的来源和维持的理论。关键词:禁区,人的安全,认识论
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
El “coto vedado” como sustento de la seguridad humana desde la teoría del conocimiento
In this paper, the theory of the “prohibited limits” and the concept of “human security” are reviewed, and its main theoretical categories are analyzed in order to identify the existing relationship between both, as well as their differential and coincidental aspects. This review was made based on a documentary methodology from both an analytical and synthetic point of view. Theoretical aspects were considered to distinguish the close relationship between both categories, hence, allowing a better understanding of the social phenomenon of human insecurity. The findings show that there is a cognitive relationship between the properties of the prohibited limits and human security as objects of knowledge. In addition, the regularity in the relationshipsbetween each of these objects and their properties were acknowledged, leading to the categories of causality and substantiality. The foregoing allows proposing the theory of the prohibited limits as source and sustenance of human security. Keywords: prohibited limits, human security, theory of knowledge
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
50.00%
发文量
16
期刊最新文献
Desafíos del Derecho Internacional Humanitario en conflictos de Guerra Híbrida Los obiter dictum como discursos del poder. Estudio a partir del caso Fernández de Kirchner Reparación a víctimas del conflicto armado en Colombia. Una mirada desde la implementación de políticas públicas Responsabilidad por Riesgo. Del derecho romano al aporte francés y su adecuación a la tecnología digital Estándar interamericano para la reparación de violencias sexuales ocurridas en el conflicto armado colombiano
×
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