The Morality of Freedom
内容简介
Book Description
Ranging over central issues of morals and politics, this book discusses the nature of freedom and authority. It examines the role of value-neutrality, rights, equality, and the prevention of harm in the liberal tradition, and relates them to fundamental moral questions such as the relation of values to social forms, the comparability of values, and the significance of personal commitments.
Synopsis
Ranging over central issues of morals and politics, this book discusses the nature of freedom and authority. It examines the role of value-neutrality, rights, equality, and the prevention of harm in the liberal tradition, and relates them to fundamental moral questions such as the relation of values to social forms, the comparability of values, and the significance of personal commitments.
......(更多)
作者简介
Joseph Raz (/rɑːz/; Hebrew: יוסף רז; born 21 March 1939) is an Israeli legal, moral and political philosopher. He is one of the most prominent advocates of legal positivism and is well known for his conception of perfectionist liberalism. Raz spent most of his career as a professor of philosophy of law at the University of Oxford associated with Balliol College, and is now a part-time professor of law at Columbia University Law School and a part-time professor at King's College London.
......(更多)
目录
1 The Problem of Political Freedom
I The Bounds of Authority
2 Authority and Reason
3 The Justification of Authority
4 The Authority of States
II Anti‐Perfectionism
5 Neutral Political Concern
6 The Exclusion of Ideals
III Individualistic Freedom: Liberty and Rights
7 The Nature of Rights
8 Right‐Based Moralities
9 Equality
10 Liberty and Rights
IV Society and Value
11 Consequentialism: An Introduction
12 Personal Well‐Being
13 Incommensurability
V Freedom and Politics
14 Autonomy and Pluralism
15 Freedom and Autonomy
......(更多)
读书文摘
依赖于一种看似合理，而没有任何理由的信念，即承认对于一致通过的正义原则的需求是每个人的最高利益。此外，这种直觉观念的表述方式不可能得到罗尔斯的赞同。它倡导的不是作为一种限制原则的中立的政治关注，而是在诸多善观念之间的中立，这种观念极其重视符合人的理性本质的个人生活的自律发展。这在事实上不是一种中立理论，而是道德多元主义理论。
并不能证明政治中立的合理性。有关中立的论证仍然有待于进一步的假定，即选择诸多原则以实现正义的社会作用是人们的最高利益。没有这一假设的支持，我们就没有理由相信，在原初状态下能够达成任何的一致同意。罗尔斯既没有说明这一假定来自于康德式的洞见，也没有说明它将导致中立的政治关注。
......(更多)
