ASSOCIANDO A IGUALDADE DEMOCRÁTICA E O IGUALITARISMO DA SORTE
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21814/eps.1.1.49Palavras-chave:
Igualdade democrática, Igualitarismo da sorte, Justiça alocativa, Justica Social, ResponsabilidadeResumo
O conceito de responsabilidade desempenha um papel crucial no debate entre os defensores da igualdade democrática, como Rawls, e os defensores do igualitarismo da sorte, como Dworkin. Neste artigo, argumenta-se que as duas teorias podem ser associadas para alcançar uma teoria da justiça que coloca a responsabilidade pessoal no seu devido lugar. O conceito de justiça requer duas concepções diferentes. As duas teorias podem ser associadas por lidarem com diferentes problemas sobre a noção de justiça. Elas devem ser associadas porque, em primeiro lugar, o igualitarismo da sorte precisa de uma teoria de fundo da justiça, e em segundo lugar, a teoria da justiça deve fornecer uma resposta à questão da distribuicão individual justa, algo que não é esclarecido pela igualdade democrática. Cada uma das duas teorias, a igualdade democrática e o igualitarismo da sorte, resolve os problemas da outra. A teoria associada levará a uma distribuição de bens que respeita o princípio de diferença e o teste da inveja.
Referências
Anderson ES (1999) What Is the Point of Equality, Ethics 109:287-337 http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/233897?journalCode=et DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/233897
Arneson R (1989) Equality and Equal Opportunity for Welfare. Philosophical Studies 56:77-93 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF00646210?LI=true DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00646210
Bolton GE, Ockenfels A (2000) ERC: A Theory of Equity, Reciprocity, and Competition. American Economic Review 90:166-93 https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.90.1.166 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.90.1.166
Camerer C (2003) Behavioral Game Theory: Experiments in Strategic Interaction. Princeton University Press, Princeton https://books.google.se/books?id=o7iRQTOe0AoC&printsec=frontcover&hl=sv&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
Cappelen A, Hole AD, Sørensen EØ, Tungodden B (2007) The Pluralism of Fairness Ideals: an Experimental Approach. American Economic Review 97:818-827 https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.97.3.818 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.97.3.818
Cappelen A, Erik. Sørensen EØ, Tungodden B (2010) Responsibility for what? Fairness and individual responsibility. European Economic Review 54: 429-441 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0014292109000890 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2009.08.005
Charness G, Rabin M (2002) Understanding Social Preferences with Simple Tests. Quarterly Journal of Economics 117:817-869 https://academic.oup.com/qje/article/117/3/817/1933015/Understanding-Social-Preferences-with-Simple-Tests DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/003355302760193904
Cohen GA (1989) On the Currency of Egalitarian Justice. Ethics 99:906-944 http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/293126?journalCode=et DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/293126
Dworkin R (1977) Taking Rights Seriously. Duckworth, London https://books.google.se/books?id=-HuwatdQKhgC&printsec=frontcover&hl=sv&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
Dworkin R (1981) What is equality? Part 2: equality of resources. Philosophy and Public Affairs 10:283-345 http://www.jstor.org./stable/2265047
Dworkin R (2000) Sovereign Virtue – The Theory and Practice of Equality. Harvard University Press, Cambridge https://books.google.se/books?id=SIOPnqu3f5kC&printsec=frontcover&hl=sv&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
Fehr E, Schmidt KM (1999) A Theory of Fairness, Competition, and Cooperation. Quarterly Journal of Economics 114:817-868 https://academic.oup.com/qje/article/114/3/817/1848113/A-Theory-of-Fairness-Competition-and-Cooperation DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/003355399556151
Hart HLA (1994) The Concept of Law, 2nd edition. Clarendon Press, Oxford https://books.google.se/books?id=hC0UDAAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&hl=sv&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
Konow J (1996) A Positive Theory of Economic Fairness. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 31:13-35 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-2681(96)00862-1
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167268196008621?via%3
Dihub Konow J (2000) Fair Shares: Accountability and Cognitive Dissonance in Allocation Decisions. American Economic Review 90:1072-1091 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.90.4.1072
https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.90.4.1072
Miller D (1999) Principles of Social Justice. Harvard University Press, Cambridge https://books.google.se/books?id=y2wMzJtEZ_8C&printsec=frontcover&hl=sv&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
Rawls J (1971) A Theory of Justice. Oxford University Press, Oxford https://books.google.se/books?id=kvpby7HtAe0C&printsec=frontcover&hl=sv&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
Rawls J (1996) Political Liberalism, 2nd edition. Columbia University Press, New York https://books.google.se/books?id=vXGZRYCkaNsC&printsec=frontcover&hl=sv&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
Rawls J (2001) Justice as Fairness: A Restatement. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge https://books.google.se/books?id=AjrXZIlbK1cC&printsec=frontcover&hl=sv&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
Roemer JE (1996) Theories of Distributive Justice. Harvard University Press, Cambridge https://books.google.se/books?id=qQkX24xj9akC&printsec=frontcover&hl=sv&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
Yaari ME, Bar-Hillel M (1984) On Dividing Justly. Social Choice and Welfare 1:1-24 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF00297056?LI=true DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00297056
Downloads
Publicado
Como Citar
Edição
Secção
Licença
Este trabalho encontra-se publicado com a Licença Internacional Creative Commons Atribuição 4.0.
