Violation of the principle of impartiality in procedural theories of justice: Political Cartesianism Vs the principle of responsibility for logical dialogue

0Citations
Citations of this article
5Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

This article has the objective of delimiting the epistemological component in the reflexive inquiry of procedural theories of justice; this article describing the way in which they are exacerbated in a modus operandi that is called political Cartesianism, that is, as the cognitive search of clear and different ideas that standardize the administration of life; Later, in opposition to political Cartesianism, the possibility of regulating the inquiry about the procedures to achieve a basic structure of social justice based on the principle of logical dialogue will be proposed, as a guarantee of the first principle of a procedural theory of justice: impartiality. In this direction, the cultural and epistemic character of impartiality will be exposed, trying to rework a framework of understanding that, instead of dispensing with cultural mentalities, includes them as a dynamizing element of interaction in the procedures for choosing basic structures of Justice.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Zorrilla, A. F. A. (2023). Violation of the principle of impartiality in procedural theories of justice: Political Cartesianism Vs the principle of responsibility for logical dialogue. Pensamiento, 79(303), 333–344. https://doi.org/10.14422/pen.v79.i303.y2023.003

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free