جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « عدالت استحقاقی » در نشریات گروه « علوم اجتماعی »

Throughout the history of philosophy, there have been questions that the most important of which can be formulated and identified around the concept of justice and freedom. In the twentieth century, the relationship between justice and freedom became more and more important for human societies, and the most important scientific works addressed it. The theory of justice proposed by John Rawls in this regard became the focus of scientific discussions and aroused the concern of politicians. Robert Nozick defended justice as entitlement in Rawls' critique of justice as fairness. They first introduced the welfare state and second the minimal government as eligible for justice in societies. Due to this, other dualities such as individual rights / collective good, equal status /equal opportunity, need / merit, etc. were proposed. In this article, after introducing the sections of the book "Statelessness, Government and Utopia", an attempt is made to analyze Nozick's criticisms of John Rawls, followed by a critical re-reading of some objections to the idea of entitlement justice and Nozick's minimal government.

Which of the following approaches to defining gender justice is the most correct? The way gender justice is defined impacts on the practical and theoretical results of this field. Using an analytical-critical method, the present article studies contemporary feminist works by Persian-language writers on gender justice, and discovers two general approaches to the definition of gender justice. “Equality justice” is one of them, which regards any gender and legal discrimination between men and women as against justice and, in fact, considers equality in all areas to be the criterion for realizing gender justice. “Desert justice”, on the other hand, does not view equality or inequality as the criterion of justice; rather, it considers either of them to be possible on the basis of careful prior studies, and thus avoids prejudice towards the criterion of gender justice. According to this article, desert justice approach is the most complete approach to defining gender justice and in order to avoid relativity in the norms of the realm of gender justice, it is necessary, in this combined pair, to define gender as the definite “man and woman” duality, and thus to define gender justice as “desert justice to men and women” contrary to the prevailing feminist trend.