首页> 外文学位 >Privacy, rights and natural law: Toward a transpersonal/ecological political theory.
【24h】

Privacy, rights and natural law: Toward a transpersonal/ecological political theory.

机译:隐私权,权利和自然法:走向超个人/生态政治理论。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

The thesis develops a broad critical overview of the privacy literature, and of the main approaches to the private/public distinction in political and legal philosophy. After looking at the growing attack on privacy, we discuss its main definitions, and lay down the metaphysical presuppositions of our own transpersonal definition. We then analyze how the emergence of privacy and personality rights counteracts the primacy of property rights in the American constitutional jurisprudence of the last hundred years. We focus on how the right to privacy was conceived first and foremost by Justice Brandeis, and then by Justice Douglas, according to a "homeorhetoric", or dynamic and non formalistic, natural law theory. Starting from Brandeisian premises, we elaborate a hierarchical tripartition of privacy/personality/property rights, resting on a principle of "essential harm", with its corollary principle of "non self-destruction", which is supposed to overcome the atomistic limits of Mill's only partially transpersonal principle of "harm to others". "Ecological transpersonalism", which Brandeis and Douglas derive most directly from Emerson and Thoreau, is thus shown to be the only approach capable of making privacy a fundamental right. In the second part, we argue in favour of the dialectical monism of the perennial and Platonic philosophy, which apprehends reality as innerly articulated into a spiritual and a material pole, and makes privacy the cornerstone of an ecological and spiritual individualism. The bipolar dualism of the Aristotelian and Thomistic traditions is seen as promoting a radical separation of spiritual and material, which subjects a despiritualized human privacy to an externalist ethics of merely traditional habits and codes. This opens the way to unipolarity, the reduction of reality to the sole material pole, and primarily to the unipolar dualism of Lockean liberalism, with its merely voluntaristic and conventional assertion of separation, an atomistic independence contradicting the full material (inter)dependence inherent in its own unipolar premises. We show how liberalism ultimately gives in to dependence, the nihilistic loss of privacy (and of the groundless ground of being that in privacy lives) characterizing the unipolar monism of the Benthamite tradition.
机译:论文对隐私文献以及政治和法律哲学中的私人/公共区分的主要方法进行了广泛的批判性概述。在研究了对隐私的日益增长的攻击之后,我们讨论了其主要定义,并提出了我们自己的超个人定义的形而上学前提。然后,我们分析了隐私权和人格权的出现如何抵消了近百年来美国宪法判例中财产权的首要地位。我们关注的重点是布兰代斯大法官,然后是道格拉斯法官根据“同性异变”或动态和非形式主义的自然法理论如何首先构想隐私权。从布兰代斯主义的前提出发,我们根据“实质损害”原则和“非自我毁灭”的推论,详细阐述了隐私/人格/财产权的三级分层结构,旨在克服米尔的原子性限制。仅部分“超越他人”的超人原则。布兰代斯和道格拉斯最直接地从艾默生和梭罗获得的“生态超个人主义”因此被证明是唯一能够使隐私成为一项基本权利的方法。在第二部分中,我们主张采用常年和柏拉图哲学的辩证一元论,该辩证法一元论将现实理解为内在地表述为精神和物质两极,并且使隐私成为生态和精神个人主义的基石。亚里士多德和托马斯主义传统的两极二元论被认为促进了精神和物质的根本分离,这使无精神状态的人类隐私服从于仅具有传统习惯和规范的外在主义伦理。这开辟了通往单极性,将现实简化为唯一的物质极点的途径,并且主要为洛克式自由主义的单极性二元论开辟了道路,其仅是自愿的和传统的分离主张,一种原子主义的独立性与内在的完整的物质(相互)依赖性相矛盾。它自己的单极前提。我们展示了自由主义如何最终屈服于依赖性,即无边无际的隐私丧失(以及隐私生活中毫无根据的虚无之地),这是边沁传统的单极一元论的特征。

著录项

  • 作者

    Scoglio, Stefano.;

  • 作者单位

    University of Toronto (Canada).;

  • 授予单位 University of Toronto (Canada).;
  • 学科 Philosophy.;Political Science General.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 1993
  • 页码 477 p.
  • 总页数 477
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

  • 入库时间 2022-08-17 11:49:58

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号