CONFLITO DISTRIBUTIVO NO BRASIL EXPLICADO PELAS CONSTITUIÇÕES

2021 ◽  
pp. 56-67
Author(s):  
Marco Aurélio de Jesus Mendes ◽  
Bruna Bechara Mendes
Keyword(s):  
Robert Nozick

Os conflitos pela distribuição dos benefícios fiscais entre os entes federativos acontecem a partir da implantação da República, desde esse período ocorreram diversas formas de disputas pelos benefícios fiscais, assim como o objeto dessas disputas se modificaram em cada mudança constitucional. Nosso objetivo é identificar nas constituições brasileiras a partir de 1891 os principais conflitos distributivos. A teoria analisada foi a teoria da justiça defendida por Robert Rawls e Robert Nozick e a revisão literária foi feita por teóricos clássicos e contemporâneos. A Metodologia utilizada foi através da pesquisa documental com revisão bibliográfica em livros, textos, documentos, artigos e foi feita pesquisa nos sites do Congresso nacional que tratam sobre o assunto. Os resultados encontrados são que os conflitos distributivos diagnosticados pela análise constitucional são decorrentes de uma divisão injusta dos benefícios fiscais entre os entes federativos. A distribuição injusta dos benefícios fiscais entre os entes federativos ocasiona crises sociais, econômicas, falta de investimentos em políticas públicas, pois o repasse dos benefícios é feito de forma vertical.

scholarly journals The Experience Machine: Existential Reflections on Virtual Worlds

2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefano Gualeni
Keyword(s):  
Video Games ◽  
Virtual Worlds ◽  
Philosophy Of Technology ◽  
Thought Experiment ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Robert Nozick ◽  
Experience Machine ◽  
Technical Reproducibility ◽  
Self Discovery ◽  
Digital Simulations

Problems and questions originally raised by Robert Nozick in his famous thought experiment ‘The Experience Machine’ are frequently invoked in the current discourse concerning virtual worlds. Having conceptualized his Gedankenexperiment in the early seventies, Nozick could not fully anticipate the numerous and profound ways in which the diffusion of computer simulations and video games came to affect the Western world.This article does not articulate whether or not the virtual worlds of video games, digital simulations, and virtual technologies currently actualize (or will actualize) Nozick’s thought experiment. Instead, it proposes a philosophical reflection that focuses on human experiences in the upcoming age of their ‘technical reproducibility’.In pursuing that objective, this article integrates and supplements some of the interrogatives proposed in Robert Nozick’s thought experiment. More specifically, through the lenses of existentialism and philosophy of technology, this article tackles the technical and cultural heritage of virtual reality, and unpacks its potential to function as a tool for self-discovery and self-construction. Ultimately, it provides an interpretation of virtual technologies as novel existential domains. Virtual worlds will not be understood as the contexts where human beings can find completion and satisfaction, but rather as instruments that enable us to embrace ourselves and negotiate with various aspects of our (individual as well as collective) existence in previously-unexperienced guises.

scholarly journals Social justice and the formal principle of freedom

2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 270-284
Author(s):  
Olga Nikolic ◽  
Igor Cvejic
Keyword(s):  
Social Justice ◽  
Moral Obligation ◽  
Significant Degree ◽  
The State ◽  
Legal Obligation ◽  
Free Society ◽  
Robert Nozick ◽  
Formal Principle ◽  
The Right ◽  
Friedrich Hayek

The aim of this paper is to show, contra the right-libertarian critique of social justice, that there are good reasons for defending policies of social justice within a free society. In the first part of the paper, we will present two influential right-libertarian critiques of social justice, found in Friedrich Hayek?s Law, Legislation and Liberty and Robert Nozick?s Anarchy, State and Utopia. Based on their approach, policies of social justice are seen as an unjustified infringement on freedoms of individual members of a society. In response to this critique, we will introduce the distincion between formal and factual freedom and argue that the formal principle of freedom defended by Hayek and Nozick does not suffice for the protection of factual freedom of members of a society, because it does not recognize (1) the moral obligation to help those who, without their fault, lack factual freedom to a significant degree, and (2) the legal obligation of the state to protect civic dignity of all members of a society. In the second part of the paper, we offer an interpretation of Kant?s argument on taxation, according to which civic dignity presupposes factual freedom, in order to argue that Kant?s justification of taxation offers good reasons for claiming that the state has the legal obligation to protect factual freedom via the policies of social justice.

scholarly journals Justiça, Integridade e Equidade: Questões Relevantes Sobre a Teoria Política de Robert Nozick

2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 28
Author(s):  
Carlos Fernando Cruz da Silva
Keyword(s):  
Robert Nozick ◽  
Ronald Dworkin

O presente trabalho efetua uma análise sobre a teoria política de Robert Nozick a partir de teses defendidas por Ronald Dworkin. O objetivo central deste artigo é investigar a validade ou invalidade dos princípios de justiça propostos por Nozick diante da teoria da integridade. A metodologia utilizada para se construir a hipótese definitiva se baseou, inicialmente, em pesquisa teórica, desenvolvida através do levantamento bibliográfico dos textos dos principais autores envolvidos. Após o levantamento, foi promovida a análise descritiva dos textos e, em sequencia, sua análise crítica. Ao final, é proposta a hipótese definitiva do problema a partir de raciocínio dedutivo.

scholarly journals Hak Atas Kebebasan Beragama/Berkeyakinan: Sebuah Upaya Pendasaran Filosofis

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 94
Author(s):  
Iqbal Hasanuddin
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
John Rawls ◽  
The Self ◽  
Freedom Of Religion ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Philosophical Foundation ◽  
Robert Nozick ◽  
Moral Foundation ◽  
The World

ABSTRACT: This paper tries to give a philosophical foundation to the rights to freedom of religion/belief. So far, the rights to freedom of religion/belief have been considered legitimated because resulted in General Assembly of the United Nations as mutual consensus of all nations around the world. Although, the normativity of the rights to freedom of religion/belief based on that mutual consensus is not ethical-philosophical, but political. By the justice argument of John Rawls and the self-ownership argument of Robert Nozick, this paper tries to give a moral foundation to the guarantee of respect and protection of the freedom of religion/belief. KEYWORDS: freedom of religion/belief, human rights instruments, forum internum, forum eksternum, justice, slef-ownership.ABSTRAK: Tujuan makalah ini adalah memberikan pendasaran filosofis bagi hak atas kebebasan beragama/berkeyakinan. Sejauh ini, hak atas kebebasan beragama/berkeyakinan (KBB) dipandang sebagai sesuatu yang bersifat normatif, karena dihasilkan dalam sidang-sidang Majelis Umum Perserikatan Bangsa-bangsa (PBB) sehingga telah menjadi konsensus bersama bangsa-bangsa di seluruh dunia. Namun demikian, normativitas hak atas KBB yang didasarkan pada konsensus bersama itu masih bersifat politis, belum memiliki dasar etis-filosofis. Melalui argumen keadilan yang didasarkan pada pemikiran John Rawls dan argumen kepemilikan-diri yang didasarkan pada pemikiran Robert Nozick, makalah ini mencoba memberikan landasan moral bagi jaminan penghormatan dan perlindungan bagi kebebasan beragama/berkeyakinan. KATA-KATA KUNCI: kebebasan beragama/berkeyakinan, instrumen-instrumen HAM, forum internum, forum eksternum, keadilan, kepemilikan-diri.

Biography: Robert Nozick

2013 ◽  
pp. 471-473
Author(s):  
Richard T. Hull
Keyword(s):  
Robert Nozick
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document