ISBN: 9780792365082 - the scepter of reason: public discussion and political radicalism in the origins of constitutionalism (law and philosophy library, band 48) (2 Ergebnisse)

ISBN: 
Mit der Detailsuche verfeinern

Optimieren Sie Ihre Suche

  • Bücher (2)

  • Neu (2)

bis

Benutzerdefinierte Preisspanne (EUR)

bis

  • Sprache: Englisch

    Verlag: Kluwer Academic Pub, 2000

    0792365089 / 9780792365082

    Serie: Buch 44 von 106 - Law and Philosophy Library

    • Hardcover

    Anbieter: Revaluation Books, Exeter, Vereinigtes KönigreichRevaluation Books

    Verkäufer/-in mit 5 Sternen
    Verkäufer/-in kontaktieren

    Zustand: Neu

    EUR 81,17

    EUR 11,98 Versand 
    Versand von Vereinigtes Königreich nach USA

    Anzahl: 2 verfügbar

    Hardcover. Zustand: Brand New. 140 pages. 9.25x6.50x0.50 inches. In Stock.

  • Sprache: Englisch

    Verlag: Springer, 2000

    0792365089 / 9780792365082

    Serie: Buch 44 von 106 - Law and Philosophy Library

    • Hardcover

    Anbieter: AHA-BUCH GmbH, Einbeck, DeutschlandAHA-BUCH GmbH

    Verkäufer/-in mit 5 Sternen
    Verkäufer/-in kontaktieren

    Zustand: Neu

    EUR 66,40

    EUR 35,00 Versand 
    Versand von Deutschland nach USA

    Anzahl: 1 verfügbar

    Buch. Zustand: Neu. Druck auf Anfrage Neuware - Printed after ordering - It is not unusual that formal and informal discussions about the political system, its virtues, and its many defects, conclude in a discussion about impartiality. In fact, we all discuss impartiality when we talk about the best way to equally consider all viewpoints. We show our concerns with impartiality when, facing a particular problem, we try to figure out the best solution for all of us, given our conflicting interests. Thus, the quest for impartiality tends to be a common objective for most of us, although we normally disagree on its particular contents. Generally, these formal and informal discussions about impartiality conclude in a dispute between different 'epistemic' conceptions. That is to say, simply, that in these situations we begin to disagree about best procedure to defme the more neutral, impartial solution for all of us.! Basically, trying to answer this question we tend to fluctuate between two opposite positions. According to some, the best way to know which is the more impartial solution is to resort to a process of collective reflection: in those situations we have to consider the opinions of all those who are possibly affected.…