904 resultados para Liberal Party - Paraguay
Resumo:
UANL
Resumo:
UANL
Resumo:
This is the audio recording of all discussion sessions of the International Conference on the Re-evaluation of Liberal Neutrality organized by CRÉUM, Montreal May 1-3 2008. (The conference announcement is at http://www.creum.umontreal.ca/spip.php?article765) // Ceci est l'enregistrement audio des périodes de discussion du colloque organisé par le CRÉUM (Montréal, 1-3 mai 2008) et portant sur une ré-évaluation de la neutralité libérale. (L'annonce du colloque est à l'adresse http://www.creum.umontreal.ca/spip.php?article765)
Resumo:
"Mémoire présenté à la Faculté des études supérieures en vue de l'obtention du grade de Maîtrise en droit (LL.M.)". Ce mémoire a été accepté à l'unanimité et classé parmi les 15% des mémoires de la discipline.
Resumo:
Document de travail
Resumo:
Dossier : Should Polygamy be Recognized in Canada ? Ethical and Legal Considerations
Resumo:
In defending the principle of neutrality, liberals have often appealed to a more general moral principle that forbids coercing persons in the name of reasons those persons themselves cannot reasonably be expected to share. Yet liberals have struggled to articulate a non-arbitrary, non-dogmatic distinction between the reasons that persons can reasonably be expected to share and those they cannot. The reason for this, I argue, is that what it means to “share a reason” is itself obscure. In this paper I articulate two different conceptions of what it is to share a reason; I call these conceptions “foundationalist” and “constructivist.” On the foundationalist view, two people “share” a reason just in the sense that the same reason applies to each of them independently. On this view, I argue, debates about the reasons we share collapse into debates about the reasons we have, moving us no closer to an adequate defense of neutrality. On the constructivist view, by contrast, “sharing reasons” is understood as a kind of activity, and the reasons we must share are just those reasons that make this activity possible. I argue that the constructivist conception of sharing reasons yields a better defense of the principle of neutrality.
Resumo:
My aim in the present paper is to develop a new kind of argument in support of the ideal of liberal neutrality. This argument combines some basic moral principles with a thesis about the relationship between the correct standards of justification for a belief/action and certain contextual factors. The idea is that the level of importance of what is at stake in a specific context of action determines how demanding the correct standards to justify an action based on a specific set of beliefs ought to be. In certain exceptional contexts –where the seriousness of harm in case of mistake and the level of an agent’s responsibility for the outcome of his action are specially high– a very small probability of making a mistake should be recognized as a good reason to avoid to act based on beliefs that we nonetheless affirm with a high degree of confidence and that actually justify our action in other contexts. The further steps of the argument consist in probing 1) that the fundamental state’s policies are such a case of exceptional context, 2) that perfectionist policies are the type of actions we should avoid, and 3) that policies that satisfy neutral standards of justification are not affected by the reasons which lead to reject perfectionist policies.
Resumo:
One of the main characteristics of today’s democratic societies is their pluralism. As a result, liberal political philosophers often claim that the state should remain neutral with respect to different conceptions of the good. Legal and social policies should be acceptable to everyone regardless of their culture, their religion or their comprehensive moral views. One might think that this commitment to neutrality should be especially pronounced in urban centres, with their culturally diverse populations. However, there are a large number of laws and policies adopted at the municipal level that contradict the liberal principle of neutrality. In this paper, I want to suggest that these perfectionistlaws and policies are legitimate at the urban level. Specifically, I will argue that the principle of neutrality applies only indirectly to social institutions within the broader framework of the nation-state. This is clear in the case of voluntary associations, but to a certain extent this rationale applies also to cities. In a liberal regime, private associations are allowed to hold and defend perfectionist views, focused on a particular conception of the good life. One problem is to determine the limits of this perfectionism at the urban level, since cities, unlike private associations, are publicinstitutions. My aim here is therefore to give a liberal justification to a limited form of perfectionism of municipal laws and policies.
Resumo:
Ce mémoire explore les modalités culturelles de la participation politique de la salonnière parisienne et célèbre écrivaine Anne-Louise-Germaine Necker, baronne de Staël-Holstein (1766-1817), au cours de la Révolution française (1789-1799). Sur le plan des représentations, il souligne chez Germaine de Staël l’appropriation et la reformulation des normes de genre pour élaborer un rôle politique convenable à une femme d’esprit dans le contexte révolutionnaire. Ce rôle se fondait notamment sur une éthique de l’amitié et un idéal de vertu acquise par la sensibilité et la raison. Son projet constitutionnel, à la fois libéral et élitiste, cherchait à intégrer la contribution des femmes au processus politique à travers la sociabilité polie et la production littéraire. Sur le plan des pratiques, ce mémoire montre comment les outils de réseautage et de communication qu’étaient le salon, la correspondance et la publication fonctionnaient ensemble pour permettre à Staël de se positionner dans un espace sociopolitique et d’y déployer une action. Il considère ces forums comme des éléments constitutifs d’une culture politique révolutionnaire dont Staël sut faire un usage créatif et constructif pour promouvoir ses idées et son parti.
Resumo:
In order to assess to the degree to which the provision of economic incentives can result in justified inequalities, we need to distinguish between compensatory incentive payments and non-compensatory incentive payments. From a liberal egalitarian perspective, economic inequalities traceable to the provision of compensatory incentive payments are generally justifiable. However, economic inequalities created by the provision of non-compensatory incentive payments are more problematic. I argue that in non-ideal circumstances justice may permit and even require the provision of non-compensatory incentives despite the fact that those who receive non-compensatory payments are not entitled to them. In some circumstances, justice may require us to accede to unreasonable demands for incentive payments by hard bargainers. This leads to a kind of paradox: from a systemic point of view, non-compensatory incentive payments can be justified even though those who receive them have no just claim to them.
Resumo:
Ce mémoire étudie les conditions d’émergence du mouvement Tea Party. Nous cherchons à savoir si la mobilisation a été facilitée par la présence d’opportunités politiques, telles que proposées dans la littérature sur les mouvements sociaux. À l’aide d’une analyse de contenu, il a été possible d’observer trois opportunités dans une période comprise entre février 2009 et octobre 2010. Dans cette même période, il a été aussi possible d’identifier la fréquence et la nature de la mobilisation, qui prend la forme de protestations et de réunions informelles. Nous en arrivons à la conclusion que ces opportunités étaient présentes lors de l’émergence du mouvement social. En effet, la présence d’enjeux spécifiques, d’une division partisane ainsi que d’alliés coïncide avec une augmentation substantielle de la mobilisation. Les élections de mi-mandat semblent avoir transformé un mouvement axé sur les protestations vers une action politique conventionnelle.