Home > Flashcards > Philosophy > LAW AND MORALITY

Details Title: LAW AND MORALITY Description: LIBERTY AND EQUALITY Total Flash Cards: 12 Created: 04/10/2007 16:55:09	To study from this set of flash cards, or to create your own your own study flash cards, register HERE. If you are already a registered user, CLICK HERE.
Cards Term BERLIN - Two concepts of Liberty" Definition Berlin deals with issues surrouding obedience and coarsion. Mainly what are the permissible limits of Coercion? aka how much of a limt should be placed on freedom Term BERLIN- NEGATIVE FREEDOM/Liberty attempts to answer the question how far a man should be able go without interference from other persons? For Berlin Absolute freedom, negative liberty is not the goal of government. Definition - free so long as free from interference; not free when coerced, when someone is deliberately interfering with my actions. -absence of obstacles, barriers or constraints. generally accorded with individual agents. Term BERLIN- POSITIVE FREEDOM Definition relates the ability of one to self-govern, the possibility of acting to pursue ones goals, and realize ones full potential. Generally associated with government and collective bodies. Prefaced on idea of rationality and normativity. Presence of rational. Internal constrains, driven by something. fall prey to authrotarianism and paternalism. Term BERLIN Believes governments should adopt: Definition Negative liberty. For Berlin negative liberty is the best becasue coarcsion is present, and is a good things because the government can limit things. Term BERLIN Coercion... Definition always implies some kind of deliberate agency. You must already have the ability to make a choice in order for you to be able to be coerced. This relates to Berlins beleif that true freedom is prefaced on moral beings. Term R. Rodriguez Justice Sbor. section 7. individual rights Definition . i think the issue is that Justice Arbor considered s.7 to have a positive element to it, and it was a right others had that she was deined because of her condition. therefore it interfered with the postive aspect of liberty inherient in s.7. Term Taylor ID DworkRR Definition Politics of EQual dignity - equal respect- INHERIENT DIGNITY - Extending Benefits (same rights and RECOGNITION - Similar to Dworkin, if judges interpret law corretly further law as INTEGRITY EQUALITY is about taking certain rights and EXTENDING them. Everyone is worth RECOGNITION then they are worth RESPECT. wE ARE LIKELY to think that what is in all of is CAPACITY to think and act RATIONALY. this is our CAPACITY TO achieve POSITIVE FREEDM. Term Politics of Difference Definition Rather then dealing to persons capacity, poltiics of difference appeals to the decisions one makes. Becuase what one acutually does is of importance, in order to give equal RECOGNITION we must acknolowedge that difference exsists. we should foster these differnces so they flourish. we must respect these difference. Do whatver is necessary to promote fostering. THIS MAY REQUIRE GIVING DIFFERENT RIGHTS TO DIFFERENT GROUPS. Term PROBLEMS WITH POLTICS OF DIGNITY 1) too abstract, wont adress discrepiancy 2) featured aroud postive freedom, capacity to self- determine then it can fall to homogenous, which is reflection of dominant and fall prey to roots of opression Definition Difference blind. - 1)abstract then we fail to adress the discrepancies in terms of oppertunties 2) If we base things on capacity, then its too indivualsit, state can become paternalistic, wont respect things in equal ways, then it turns into homogenous consistencey 2) reflection of dominant. thus roots of opression... Term Problems with Poliitics of Difference violates principle of,. Definition 1) claims give people equal repsect while PROMOTING DIFFERENCE , violates prinicple of Non-discrimination. 2)May concentrate on others, give priviage unequal treatment.. Term Objectional Difference Definition - not bad luck they are determined Term Rodriguez again. neg inherient in 1 does not outeweigh positive in section 7. Definition sue with sec.1 was that they couldnt deny her positive right under s.7 by appealing to the issue of fundamental justice in sec.1 because they felt it was not demonstratable under that principle. basically the negative restraints inherint in sec.1 were not strong enough to overturn the positive aspect of sec.7...