Bir Adalet Teorisi

Bir Adalet Teorisi John Rawls taraf ndan yaz lan Bir Adalet Teorisi belki de yirminci y zy l n ahlak ve siyaset felsefesi zerine yap lm en nemli al mas d r Kant n ve Mill in al malar n n yan nda duran bir klasiktir Raw

  • Title: Bir Adalet Teorisi
  • Author: John Rawls Vedat Ahsen Coşar
  • ISBN: 9786059801508
  • Page: 388
  • Format: Paperback
  • John Rawls taraf ndan yaz lan Bir Adalet Teorisi belki de yirminci y zy l n ahlak ve siyaset felsefesi zerine yap lm en nemli al mas d r, Kant n ve Mill in al malar n n yan nda duran bir klasiktir Rawls, adaletin do ru ilkelerinin, zg r ve rasyonel ki ilerin yer ald klar orijinal pozisyon da bir bilinmezlik perdesi arkas nda toplumdaki kendi yerlerini, s n flJohn Rawls taraf ndan yaz lan Bir Adalet Teorisi belki de yirminci y zy l n ahlak ve siyaset felsefesi zerine yap lm en nemli al mas d r, Kant n ve Mill in al malar n n yan nda duran bir klasiktir Rawls, adaletin do ru ilkelerinin, zg r ve rasyonel ki ilerin yer ald klar orijinal pozisyon da bir bilinmezlik perdesi arkas nda toplumdaki kendi yerlerini, s n flar n , rklar n cinsiyetlerini, yeteneklerini, zekalar n ve g lerini, hatta iyi de er kavramlar n bilmeden bile zerinde anla t klar ilkeler oldu unu ileri s rer Buna g re Rawls, t retti i adaletin iki ilkesinin, zg rl klerin da t m n , sosyal ve ekonomik de erleri d zenledi ini iddia eder Kitab n orijinal metni 1975 y l nda yap lan Almanca terc mlesi i in nemli l de g zden ge irilmi tir Bu d zeltmeler sonraki t m terc melere ve kitab n yeni bask lar na dahil edilmi tir Elinizdeki T rk e terc me, d zeltilmi metin dikkate al narak yap lm t r Harvard niversitesi nden emekli olduktan sonra James Bryant Conant niversitesi nde de profes r olarak g rev yapan, siyaset ve etik felsefesine nemli katk larda bulunan ve ayn zamanda hukuk u da olan John Rawls n di er nemli eserleri aras nda, T rk eye de evrilmi olan The Law of People s Halklar n Yasas ile Political Liberalism Siyasal Liberalizm say labilir.

    • Free Read [Philosophy Book] ☆ Bir Adalet Teorisi - by John Rawls Vedat Ahsen Coşar ó
      388 John Rawls Vedat Ahsen Coşar
    • thumbnail Title: Free Read [Philosophy Book] ☆ Bir Adalet Teorisi - by John Rawls Vedat Ahsen Coşar ó
      Posted by:John Rawls Vedat Ahsen Coşar
      Published :2020-02-24T11:04:04+00:00

    About "John Rawls Vedat Ahsen Coşar"

    1. John Rawls Vedat Ahsen Coşar

      John Bordley Rawls was an American philosopher and a leading figure in moral and political philosophy He held the James Bryant Conant University Professorship at Harvard His magnum opus A Theory of Justice 1971 is now regarded as one of the primary texts in political philosophy His work in political philosophy, dubbed Rawlsianism, takes as its starting point the argument that most reasonable principles of justice are those everyone would accept and agree to from a fair position Rawls employs a number of thought experiments including the famous veil of ignorance to determine what constitutes a fair agreement in which everyone is impartially situated as equals, in order to determine principles of social justice.Rawls received both the Schock Prize for Logic and Philosophy and the National Humanities Medal in 1999, the latter presented by President Bill Clinton, in recognition of how Rawls s thought helped a whole generation of learned Americans revive their faith in democracy itself.


    1. What strikes me most as a non-philosopher reading this book is what Rawls doesn’t talk about. Libertarian ideas, the staple of American political and social discourse, receive no attention as such in this book. To the extent that libertarianism factors in at all, Rawls dismisses it so peremptorily he practically laughs at it. Yet his oblique approach does take on its precepts, as I‘ll mention later.A Theory of Justice takes up a problem that goes back to the Enlightenment: If rights inure to [...]

    2. My beef with John Rawls is twofold. First, there's his seriously questionable method invoking the "veil of ignorance," which is just a spiffier version of the easy-to-discredit social contract theory. Second, he seems to arrive at remarkably dull conclusions, that liberal democracy is the best possible way of dealing with human relations. OK, so first you're assuming all the assumptions that Western post-Enlightenment classical-liberals have, and then using those assumptions to inform a spurious [...]

    3. The book that I wound up reading most often in college (my major was Ethics, Politics and Economics). It shaped my worldview and politics perhaps more than any other book ever. I am elevating it from 4 stars to 5 stars because of that, in spite of the fact that it can be a bit of a slog. With this book, Rawls reignited political theory after a period during which not much of anything new had been said for decades, but he's not exactly a brilliant prose stylist.

    4. Although he's liberalism's pet philosopher, the important concepts in this book are completely misguided: nooilforpacifists Not understanding economics, he basises justice on a "fairness" (the famous "veil of ignorance") dis-coupled from economic reality and markets. It fails to account for progress, productivity, and the possibility of change. In the end, Rawls was neither a philosopher, nor a moralist--he was a liberal scold, who (regrettably) lives on providing aid and comfort to extreme move [...]

    5. A long involved theory of justice - create a society where you would be treated fairly, if you do not know what position you would occupy in such a society.

    6. צדק, צדק תרדוף (דברים, ט"ז, כ´) בדצמבר 2010 יצא לאור, בשעה טובה, התרגום הראשון לעברית של התיאוריה שהשפיעה על המחשבה הפוליטית והחברתית ב- 30 שנים האחרונות מאז פרסומה בצורתה המקורית בשנת 1971. כמו כל תיאוריה פוליטית וכלכלית אחרת שמגיעה אלינו מארה"ב, לקח קצת זמן אבל הינה היא כאן בצורתה ה [...]

    7. In "A Theory of Justice", John Rawls presents a conception of justice which, as he puts it, generalises and carries to a higher level of abstraction the social contract theory. So, rather than dictating the exact form of government to be applied, the persons in the Rawls' original position would, in trying to further their own interests, decide upon principles of justice to regulate the basic distributive structure of society. Concerned only with institutional justice, the theory dictates that i [...]

    8. So, first off: this is a work of academic philosophy. I think it's very readable and entertaining for a work of academic philosophy, but this is probably not a book to take to the beach. It also helps if you've had a basic course in philosophy, or have recently read a book like Michael Sandel's Justice, because the book will be very hard going if you don't have at least a glimmer of an idea about utilitarianism or Kantianism. So, why read Rawls? It's often asserted that Rawls's work is the philo [...]

    9. John Rawls presents the reader with a thought experiment based on the social contract, original position, and his very own "veil of ignorance." So this thought experiment is a hypothetical situation that is really just a very dull gambling scheme where the players must make decisions about the structure of society. The thing that's supposed to be so revolutionary is that these players aren't aware of their position in society and they don't really know anything about their own identity, except t [...]

    10. Ok, I didn't read all of this one. Basically he argues that society should be based in a way that any good should help everyone. Against exploitation of the poorest for the benefit of the rich, which is a fair argument. However, he also argues that growth should not happen just for the rich while leaving the poor behind. Too much equalization of opportunity at the tax payers' expense for my liking. His political theory is however integral to understanding the trend of government over the past 50 [...]

    11. On page 432 of this hefty work, Rawls writes:"Imagine someone whose only pleasure is to count blades of grass in various geometrically shaped areas such as park squares and well-trimmed lawns. He is otherwise intelligent and actually possesses unusual skills, since he manages to survive by solving difficult mathematical problems for a fee. The definition of the good forces us to admit that the good for this man is indeed counting blades of grass, or more accurately, his good is determined by a p [...]

    12. If Rawls had understood expected utility theory this book would be better -- and unrecognisable. His response to decision making under uncertainty is iconoclastic, and absurd.

    13. I’ll start with just a word of complaint. There is no reason at all why an intelligent person like John Rawls should write so badly. One does not expect Mark Twain, George Orwell or even J K Galbraith. However, Rawls could have put in some examples, so that the reader did not sink into a bog of abstract nouns, and it would have been good if he had injected an occasional flash of wit to dissuade the reader from falling off his chair. This having been said, the book is useful and interesting. It [...]

    14. It's crazy what you can make out of rationalism. Read the first chapter in order to get a rough summary of what in principle the theory consists in. It's a very impressive book that picks up some substantive argumentations further down the road, but still it's not quite my cup of tea.

    15. I'll just say, like a good number of philosophers, Rawls is not a good writer. His book is repetitive and not anywhere near as concise as it could have been. I was actually rereading it this time out, having read it in school, and was not as taken with it this time out. Pros: 1. The Veil of Ignorance is a great thought experiment, one of the all time greats. Rawls establishes the Kantian idea of autonomous action perfectly. Too bad he quickly abandons Kant and instead creates something more simi [...]

    16. This book is truly a modern classic. First published around 1970, it is the fountainhead of the modern renaissance of political philosophy and theory which is still going strong four decades later. It is built around the choices Rawls believes people would make if they were behind a veil of ignorance - unable to see the consequences of their choices. This device has by itself provoked a huge response, including Robert Nozick's very interesting Anarchy, State and Utopia with its argument for at l [...]

    17. Have only skimmed it - need help in understanding it so have bought Rawls by Freeman who is apparently an expert. My OU Masters Course is helping me to understand it more thoroughly - it does present difficulties for the current conservative libertarian approach. About to start his later works where he apparently clarifies many of his ideas. As a starting point for a fully systematic approach to creating a more complete normative theory of political society it cannot be beaten. I suggest it is r [...]

    18. "What is needed, then, is not a general pacifism but a discriminating conscientious refusal to engage in war in certain circumstances. States have not been loath to recognize pacifism and to grant it a special status. The refusal to take part in all war under any conditions is an unworldly view bound to remain a sectarian doctrine. It no more challenges the state’s authority than the celibacy of priests challenges the sanctity of marriage."

    19. Why You Should Actually Read A Theory of JusticeIf pressed for the most simplistic one-sentence answer to how I viewed my understanding of this work I would not hesitate to exclaim, “The most conclusive qualitative argument for ‘justice as fairness’”. Notwithstanding, this simplistic exclamation needs to be supported in a way that encourages others, who are inclined, to relish the challenge of critical discourse on the imperative questions of political philosophy raised by John Rawls.As [...]

    20. Akhirnya saya mengalami pengajaran Rocky Gerung. Rabu 8 Oktober 2014 di kelas Filsafat Politik. Hari itu saya belajar tentang teori keadilan John Rawls. John Rawls seorang intelektual liberalis Amerika, buku Theory of justice yang ia tulis menjadi wacana yang tak habis-habis dibahas oleh pemikir teori politik dan keadilan hingga saat ini. Ada beberapa kejadian yang melatar belakangi pemikiran John Rawls. Amerika pada saat itu sedang kacau. Sangat bebas tapi tak memiliki order yang jelas untuk me [...]

    21. In A Theory of Justice, Rawls puts forward a systematic alternative to utilitarian conceptions of justice with his own formulation: Justice as Fairness. Rejecting the utilitarian notion that justice consists of adopting whatever arrangements ensure the greatest benefit for the greatest number, Rawls argues that the practical application of utilitarian ideas, the search for the most "productive" arrangement rather than the most "just", undermines the sanctity and inviolability of the individual, [...]

    22. John Rawls' magnum opus 'A Theory of Justice' (this copy was the 2nd ed.) is such a staple of contemporary political and moral philosophy that it is difficult for an amateur like me to review it. Given the nature of the project Rawls sought to accomplish, it is only good and proper that a dozen years' research into both this and his other (and better, in my opinion) opus, 'Political Liberalism', would produce a decent review of Rawlsian Justice as a whole. However, as somebody who takes many of [...]

    23. جان رالز با وام گرفتن ایده قرارداد اجتماعی هابز، لاک و نظریه ای در باب عدالت اجتماعی طرح ریزی می کند، "عدالت به مثابه انصاف". جهت جلوگیری از تاثیر پذیرفتن توافق/قرارداد آغازین از پیشایندی های طبیعی و اجتماعی (استعدادهای فردی و طبقه اجتماعی متفاوت و )، افراد حاضر در توافق آغازی [...]

    24. I read this gosh, about fifteen years ago now. Something about it always bugged me. Rawls is trying to build on Kant's theory of ethics. Kant's thing was classic Enlightenment: trying to divorce morality from Christianity. Rawls' development is the veil of ignorance - essentially a social contract based on the Golden Rule. The question is, what's your foundation for doing unto others as you would have them do unto you? Rawls doesn't argue from Christianity, of course, nor natural law, but self- [...]

    25. Interesting Quote:"The most natural way, then, of arriving a utilitarianism (although not, of course, the only way of doing so) is to adopt for society as a whole the principle of rational choice for one man. Once this is recognized, the place of the impartial spectator and the emphasis on sympathy in the history of utilitarian thought is readily understood. For it is by the conception of the impartial spectator and the use of sympathetic identification in guiding our imagination that the princi [...]

    26. It seems implausible that I'll ever get to this, but if I do, then: Reminder to self: consider Joshua Greene's endnote, page 383, from Moral Tribes: Emotion, Reason, and the Gap Between Us and Them.

    27. How do we decide what is just and what is not? What is justice in itself?Imagine you have to decide on these things without knowing certain aspects about yourself such as your position in society, your wealth and share of natural goods and assets, you don't know your strength or your intelligence level, you don't even know where you live or the colour of your skin. How would you decide in this case?John Rawls says that rational people would accept an original position of equality that would maxi [...]

    28. کتابی که به خواندنش می‌ارزید. ایده‌ای جذاب داشت و برای اقتصاد و سیاست و. مسیری نشان می‌داد. در حلقه خواندیم

    Leave a Comment