Equilíbrio Reflexivo e Conhecimento Moral: o caso da teoria da justiça como equidade
DOI :
https://doi.org/10.5902/2179378666931Mots-clés :
Equilíbrio reflexivo, Conhecimento Moral, Justiça como Equidade, John Rawls.Résumé
O objetivo deste artigo é investigar o escopo do método do equilíbrio reflexivo e sua relação com o conhecimento moral, refletindo sobre o papel deste método na teoria da justiça como equidade de John Rawls. Para tal, iniciamos mostrando a influência do método na filosofia moral e política. Depois, a investigação tem por foco analisar a importância do equilíbrio reflexivo na teoria rawlsiana, destacando o uso do equilíbrio reflexivo estreito e amplo sobretudo nas obras “Outline of a decision procedure for ethics”, A Theory of Justice e “The independence of moral theory” e o uso do equilíbrio reflexivo geral e pleno nas obras Justice as Fairness,Political Liberalism, “Reply to Habermas” e The Law of Peoples. Na parte final do texto, a ideia é defender o equilíbrio reflexivo como um método bastante adequado para a obtenção da objetividade das crenças éticas, podendo ser interpretado como um tipo de conhecimento moral.
Téléchargements
Références
ANDREAZZA, Tiaraju. Equilíbrio reflexivo amplo e a revisibilidade das crenças morais. Ethic@, Florianópolis, Vol. 14, N. 3, 2015, pp. 473-489.
ARRAS, John. The Way We Reason Now: Reflective Equilibrium in Bioethics. In: The Oxford Handbook of Bioethics, B. Steinbock (Ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007, pp. 46-71.
BEAUCHAMP, Tom L.; CHILDRESS, James F. Principles of Biomedical Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.
BRANDT, Richard. A Theory of the Good and the Right. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1979.
BRANDT, Richard. The Science of Man and Wide Reflective Equilibrium. Ethics, Vol. 100, 1990, pp. 259–278.
BRINK, David. Moral Realism and the Foundations of Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989.
BUCHANAN, Allen. Our Moral Fate: Evolution and the Escape from Tribalism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2020.
DALL’AGNOL, Darlei. Equilíbrio Reflexivo na Bioética. Dissertatio (UFPel), Vol. 34, 2011, pp. 135-159.
DANIELS, Norman. Wide Reflective Equilibrium and Theory Acceptance in Ethics. The Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 76, N. 5, 1979, pp. 256-282.
DANIELS, Norman. Justice and Justification: Reflective Equilibrium in Theory and Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.
DANIELS, Norman. Reflective Equilibrium. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2016. Acesso em 07/07/2021.
DARWALL, Stephen; GIBBARD, Allan; RAILTON, Peter. Toward Fin de siecle Ethics: Some Trends. The Philosophical Review, Vol. 101, N. 1, 1992, pp. 115-189.
De MAAGT, Sem. Reflective Equilibrium and Moral Objectivity. Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 60, N. 5, 2017, pp. 443-465.
DWORKIN, Ronald. Law’s Empire. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1986.
DWORKIN, Ronald. Justice in Robes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2006.
DePAUL, Michael R. Reflective Equilibrium and Foundationalism. American Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 23, N. 1, 2006, pp. 59-69.
FISCHER, John; RAVIZZA, Mark. Responsibility and Control: A Theory of Moral Responsibility. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998.
FLOYD, Jonathan. Rawls’ Methodological Blueprint. European Journal of Political Philosophy, Vol. 16, N. 3, 2017, pp. 367-381.
FREEMAN, Samuel. Rawls. London and New York: Routledge, 2007.
GETTIER, Edmund L. “Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?”. Analysis, Vol. 23, No. 6, 1963, pp. 121-123.
GOODMAN, Nelson. Fact, Fiction, and Forecast. 4a ed. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1983.
HAMPSHIRE, Stuart. Two Theories of Morality. New York: Oxford University Press, 1977.
HAMPSHIRE, Stuart. Morality and Conflict. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1984.
HARE, Richard M. Rawls' Theory of Justice. Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 23, 1973, pp. 144–155.
HARMAN, Gilbert. Three trends in moral and political philosophy. Journal of Value Inquiry, Vol. 37, N. 3, 2003, pp. 415–425.
KELLY, Thomas; MCGRATH, Sarah. Is Reflective Equilibrium Enough? Philosophical Perspectives, Vol. 24, N. 1, 2010, pp. 325–359.
MIKHAIL, John. Rawls’ Concept of Reflective Equilibrium and Its Original Function in A Theory of Justice. Washington University Jurisprudence Review, Vol. 3, Issue 1, 2011, pp. 1-30.
NIELSEN, Kai. How to Proceed in Social Philosophy: Contextualist Justice and Wide Reflective Equilibrium. Queen’s Law Journal, Vol. 20, 1994, pp. 89-137.
NIELSEN, Kai. Reflective Equilibrium. In: The Blackwell Encyclopedia Dictionary of Business Ethics, 2nd Edition, P. H. Werhane; E. Freeman (Eds.). Oxford: Blackwell, 2004, pp. 546-549.
PUTNAM, Hilary. Ethics without Ontology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2004.
RAWLS, John. A Brief Inquiry into the Nature and Function of Ethical Theory. The Papers of John Rawls, Harvard University Archives, HUM 48 Box, Folder 3, 1946.
RAWLS, John. A Study on the Grounds of Ethical Knowledge: Considered with Reference to Judgments on the Moral Worth of Character. PhD. Dissertation. Princeton University, 1950.
RAWLS, John. Outline of a Decision Procedure for Ethics. Philosophical Review, Vol. 60, No. 2, 1951, pp. 177-197.
RAWLS, John. Two Concepts of Rules. The Philosophical Review, Vol. 64, N. 1, 1955, pp. 3-32.
RAWLS, John. A Theory of Justice. Orig. Edition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1971.
RAWLS, John. A Theory of Justice. Revised Edition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999.
RAWLS, John. The Independence of Moral Theory. Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association, Vol. 48, 1975, pp. 5-22.
RAWLS, John. Justice as Fairness: A Restatement. Ed. Erin Kelly. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001.
RAWLS, John. Political Liberalism. Expanded Edition. New York: Columbia University Press, 1996.
RAWLS, John. The Law of Peoples with “The Idea of Public Reason Revisited”. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999.
RAWLS, John. Reply to Habermas. In: RAWLS, J. Political Liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press, 1996, pp. 372-434.
REIDY, David. From Philosophical Theology to Democratic Theory: Early Postcards from an Intellectual Journey. In: MANDLE, Jon; REIDY, David (Eds.). A Companion to Rawls. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell, 2014, pp. 9-30.
RORTY, Richard. Objectivity, Relativism, and Truth: Philosophical Papers, Vol. I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991.
SAVULESCU, Julien; GYNGELL, Christopher; KAHANE, Guy. Collective Reflective Equilibrium in Practice and Controversial Novel Technologies. Bioethics, 2021, pp. 1-12.
SCANLON, Thomas. Rawls on Justification. In: FREEMAN, Samuel. (Ed.). The Cambridge Companion to Rawls. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003, pp. 139-167.
SCANLON, Thomas. What We Owe to Each Other. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998.
SINGER, Peter. Sidgwick and Reflective Equilibrium. Monist, Vol. 58, N. 3, 1974, pp. 490–517.
SEN, Amarty. The Idea of Justice. London: Allen Lane, 2009.
TAN, Kok-Chor. Reasonable Disagreement and Distributive Justice. Journal of Value Inquiry, Vol. 35, 2001, pp. 493–507.
TERSMAN, Folke. Recent Work on Reflective Equilibrium and Method in Ethics. Philosophy Compass, Vol. 13, N. 6, 2018, e12493.
WALDEN, Kenneth. In Defense of Reflective Equilibrium. Philosophical Studies, Vol. 166, N. 2, 2013, pp. 243-256.
Téléchargements
Publiée
Versions
- 2022-09-13 (2)
- 2022-09-12 (1)
Comment citer
Numéro
Rubrique
Licence
(c) Tous droits réservés Voluntas: Revista Internacional de Filosofia 2022
Ce travail est disponible sous licence Creative Commons Attribution - Pas d’Utilisation Commerciale - Partage dans les Mêmes Conditions 4.0 International.
A submissão de originais para este periódico implica na transferência, pelos autores, dos direitos de publicação impressa e digital. Os direitos autorais para os artigos publicados são do autor, com direitos do periódico sobre a primeira publicação. Os autores somente poderão utilizar os mesmos resultados em outras publicações indicando claramente este periódico como o meio da publicação original.
A Voluntas é um periódico de acesso aberto sob a licença Creative Commons Atribuição-NãoComercial-CompartilhaIgual 4.0 Internacional (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0).
