Michael Walzer - Complex Equality

GRIN Verlag
Free sample

Seminar paper from the year 2003 in the subject Politics - Political Theory and the History of Ideas Journal, grade: 1,3 (A), University of Erfurt (Political Science), 1 entries in the bibliography, language: English, abstract: To begin this essay about the theory of the spheres of justice developed by Michael Walzer, I would like to quote the author with a phrase from the Preface of his book "Spheres of Justice": "But we know that money equally distributed at twelve noon of a Sunday will be unequally redistributed before the week is out." (Walzer, 1983: xi) Michael Walzer is a philosopher who wrote his most famous book (from which I just quoted) about distributive justice and equality, he points himself against the egalitarianist philosophic direction that for example John Rawls is representing. Walzer critizes egalitarianism by beginning at a crucial point: Human beings are not equal, they have far less in common than there are differences between them. For him, one question arises out of the following statement: "We are very different and we are also manifestly alike. Now, what (complex) arrangements follow from the difference and the likeliness?" (Walzer, 1983: xii) The big difference in egalitarian and his thinking, Walzer describes as follows: For him, egalitarianism aims at eliminating dominance by forcing human beings to be equal But Walzer thinks that domination does not derive from dominant human beings but that it is mediated by a set of social goods. His claim is then: "We have to understand and control social goods; we do not have to stretch or shrink human beings." (Walzer, 1983: xiii)
Read more
Loading...

Additional Information

Publisher
GRIN Verlag
Read more
Published on
Nov 20, 2003
Read more
Pages
13
Read more
ISBN
9783638231398
Read more
Read more
Best For
Read more
Language
English
Read more
Genres
Political Science / History & Theory
Read more
Content Protection
This content is DRM protected.
Read more
Eligible for Family Library

Reading information

Smartphones and Tablets

Install the Google Play Books app for Android and iPad/iPhone. It syncs automatically with your account and allows you to read online or offline wherever you are.

Laptops and Computers

You can read books purchased on Google Play using your computer's web browser.

eReaders and other devices

To read on e-ink devices like the Sony eReader or Barnes & Noble Nook, you'll need to download a file and transfer it to your device. Please follow the detailed Help center instructions to transfer the files to supported eReaders.
Seminar paper from the year 2003 in the subject Communications - Theories, Models, Terms and Definitions, grade: 1,3 (A), University of Erfurt (Communication Science), course: Intercultural Communication, 10 entries in the bibliography, language: English, abstract: The main representant of Structuration Theory is Anthony Giddens who developed the idea of structuration in his book “The Constitution of Society” written in 1984. The theory wants to explain the ways in which social systems are produced and reproduced in social interaction. In contrast to other social theories, structuration theory claims to explain the relationship between the micro-societal and the macro-societal level. Giddens says that social life is not only explained by individual actions but can on the other hand neither be explained only by looking on macro-level social force. The central proclamation of structuration theory is that the repetition of individual acts reproduces social structures. This means, individuals act on the micro level in order to accomplish their intentions, but these actions have “unintended consequences of establishing structures that affect our future actions” (Littlejohn, 2002: 152). Like this, human beings can modify these structures by replacing them or reproducing the structures in a different way. Thus, structuration means studying the reproduction of individua l face-to-face interactions on the societal level. The reproductions of the structures is illustrated by Giddens ́ so called “stratification model of the agent”. At first, there is the motivation of the action, the reason why the agent acts. In the rationalization process, the agent adapts his action to his general theoretical understanding of the basis of his activity. Reflexive monitoring of action means that individuals monitor continously and routinely the social and physical contexts of their actions and the actions themselves. But this monitoring cannot prevent that the actions has some unintended consequences. These can modify the structures the action was placed in and then lead to new unacknowledged conditions of the action. These new conditions influence the following actions and like this close the continous circle.
With the courage, honesty, and compassion that have made her one of America's most provocative authorities on modern culture, bell hooks takes on the interior lives of men and answers their most intimate questions about love.
Everyone needs to love and be loved -- even men. In this groundbreaking book, bell hooks gets to the heart of the matter and shows men how to express the emotions that are a fundamental part of who they are -- whatever their age, ethnicity, or cultural persuasion.
Written in response to the author's in-depth discussions with men who were inspired by her trilogy, All About Love, Salvation, and Communion, bell hooks's The Will to Change addresses maleness and masculinity in new and challenging ways. With trademark candor and fierce intelligence, hooks answers the most common concerns of men, such as fear of intimacy and loss of their patriarchal place in society. She believes men can find the way to spiritual unity by getting back in touch with the emotionally open part of themselves. Only through this liberation will they lay claim to the rich and rewarding inner lives that have historically been the exclusive province of women. Men can access these feelings by giving themselves permission to be vulnerable. As they grow more comfortable and start believing that it's okay to feel, to need, and to desire, they will thrive as equal partners in their intimate relationships.
Whether they are straight or gay, black or white, The Will to Change helps men to reclaim the best part of themselves.
Seminar paper from the year 2003 in the subject Communications - Theories, Models, Terms and Definitions, grade: 1,3 (A), University of Erfurt (Communication Science), course: Intercultural Communication, 10 entries in the bibliography, language: English, abstract: The main representant of Structuration Theory is Anthony Giddens who developed the idea of structuration in his book “The Constitution of Society” written in 1984. The theory wants to explain the ways in which social systems are produced and reproduced in social interaction. In contrast to other social theories, structuration theory claims to explain the relationship between the micro-societal and the macro-societal level. Giddens says that social life is not only explained by individual actions but can on the other hand neither be explained only by looking on macro-level social force. The central proclamation of structuration theory is that the repetition of individual acts reproduces social structures. This means, individuals act on the micro level in order to accomplish their intentions, but these actions have “unintended consequences of establishing structures that affect our future actions” (Littlejohn, 2002: 152). Like this, human beings can modify these structures by replacing them or reproducing the structures in a different way. Thus, structuration means studying the reproduction of individua l face-to-face interactions on the societal level. The reproductions of the structures is illustrated by Giddens ́ so called “stratification model of the agent”. At first, there is the motivation of the action, the reason why the agent acts. In the rationalization process, the agent adapts his action to his general theoretical understanding of the basis of his activity. Reflexive monitoring of action means that individuals monitor continously and routinely the social and physical contexts of their actions and the actions themselves. But this monitoring cannot prevent that the actions has some unintended consequences. These can modify the structures the action was placed in and then lead to new unacknowledged conditions of the action. These new conditions influence the following actions and like this close the continous circle.
Studienarbeit aus dem Jahr 2003 im Fachbereich BWL - Unternehmensethik, Wirtschaftsethik, Universität Erfurt, Veranstaltung: Seminar Markt und Moral, Sprache: Deutsch, Abstract: „Heute denkt doch jeder nur noch an sich selbst!“, „Die Wirtschaftsbosse da oben, das sind doch alles eiskalte Typen, die haben doch keinen Anstand!“, „Für Geld würden die Wirtschaftsleute doch über Leichen gehen!“, „Alles, was heutzutage zählt, ist das Geld. Werte haben die doch alle nicht mehr!“ Solche und ähnliche Sätze begegnen einem jeden Tag. Das ökonomische Gesellschaftsfeld ist immer noch und immer wieder den stärksten Anfeindungen ausgesetzt, was das Fehlen von Werten, Moral, Anstand, oder wie immer man es nennen mag, anbelangt. Doch sind die, die solche Thesen vertreten, denn selbst frei von jeglichem eigennützigen, unmoralischen oder anstandslosen Verhalten? Ist es überhaupt möglich, als ein Individuum in einer Gesellschaft nicht an sein eigenes Wohl zu denken? Und ab wann ist das „An-sich-selbst-denken“ unmoralisch? Die vorliegende Hausarbeit beschäftigt sich mit der Frage nach Moral in ökonomischen Kontexten. Im ersten Teil wird auf der Grundlage eines Textes von Guy Kirsch der Unterschied zwischen dem „self interest“ und dem „interest in one ́s own self“ erörtert und Kirschs Konzept des moralischen Raums vorgestellt. Der zweite Teil zeigt eine andere Perspektive auf das Phänomen des Eigeninteresses auf. Ausgehend von einem Text von Christine Chwaszcza wird das Eigeninteresse einmal als anthropologisches Axiom der Handlungstheorie und einmal als axiologische Prämisse der Moralphilosophie beleuchtet. Im vorletzten Kapitel werden die vier von Karl Reinhard Lohmann beschriebenen vom Bayesschen-Konsequentialismus-Modell ausgehenden Entscheidungstypen vorgestellt. Das letzte und abschließende Kapitel besteht aus einer persönlichen Stellungnahme zu den dargestellten Positionen und Konzepten.
Studienarbeit aus dem Jahr 2003 im Fachbereich Philosophie - Praktische (Ethik, Ästhetik, Kultur, Natur, Recht, ...), Note: 1,3, Universität Erfurt (Lehrstuhl für Praktische Philosophie), Sprache: Deutsch, Abstract: 1.) Begriffsklärungen 1.1) Soziobiologie Der erste Terminus, der im Rahmen des Themas der vorliegenden Arbeit geklärt werden sollte, ist Soziobiologie. Soziobiologie untersucht im Gegensatz zur klassischen Disziplin (der Biologie oder Evolutionsbiologie) nicht die biologische Evolution von Tieren und Menschen, sondern nimmt die Evolution sozialer Verhaltensweisen in den Blick. Soziobiologie versucht zunächst, den Nutzen von sozialem Verhalten zu ergründen. Der Fokus richtet sich dann auch auf altruistisches Verhalten, sowohl im Tierreich als auch beim Menschen. Ziel ist es, den Selektionsvorteil von sozialem Verhalten ausfindig zu machen, falls es einen solchen gibt. Der Grund für diesen Ansatzpunkt liegt in der Darwinistischen Evolutionstheorie, nach der sich soziales Verhalten in der Evolution nicht hätte durchsetzen können. Als Begründer der Soziobiologie wird William D. Hamilton gesehen, der 1964 erstmals den Term Soziobiologie prägte. Bekannt wurde der soziobiologische Ansatz aber erst 1976 durch einen Aufsatz von Richard Dawkins. 1.2) Evolution Die biologische Erforschung der Evolution ist stark geprägt durch die Theorie von Charles Darwin, dessen Kernaussage zusammengefasst in etwa folgendes besagt: In der Natur kann "Neues" nur durch Mutationen oder Neukombinationen von Erbgut (bspw. bei einer Befruchtung) entstehen. Wichtig ist jedoch nicht die Entstehung des "Neuen", sondern ob sich das neue Merkmal bzw. die neue Eigenschaft durchsetzt. Den Vorgang des Durchsetzens bezeichnet man in der Biologie als Selektion. Das heißt, nur die Merkmale setzen sich durch, die dem Merkmalsträger Vorteile bringen, ihm also das Überleben leichter machen. Die Individuen, die die neueren, besseren Merkmale tragen, setzen sich durch, die anderen werden verdrängt und sterben aus oder werden zahlenmäßig extrem dezimiert. Diesen Prozess bezeichnet man als den Mutations-Selektions-Mechanismus. Nach Henning Stieve (vgl. Stieve, 2000) gibt es zwei Arten von Evolution: die biologische und die kulturelle Evolution. Die biologische Evolution funktioniert rein nach dem Mutations-Selektions-Mechanismus, während die kulturelle Evolution komplexere Phänomene und Prozesse beinhaltet. ...
©2018 GoogleSite Terms of ServicePrivacyDevelopersArtistsAbout Google|Location: United StatesLanguage: English (United States)
By purchasing this item, you are transacting with Google Payments and agreeing to the Google Payments Terms of Service and Privacy Notice.