Aristotelian Justice – A Study By Artur Victoria

otherness, unlike Aristotle, who prefers to indicate the corrective justice as an expression of the Under competition, such as equity (here), and the mercy and generosity.

Clearly, defending the positions of Aristotelian corrective justice rather than platonic, saying:

”In the debate between Plato and Aristotle, do not hesitate to get in the side of Aristotle. Because if there are thirty-five, I had the courage to write that philosophy is the systematic study of the confusing concepts, the concept of justice is that seems better illustrate this argument. “

PERELMAN justifies the foundation of justice as “consensus” by two assumptions: The implicit consensus and collective consensus and indirectly, by the authority. As a practical way to solve them must resort to dialectical reasoning (although the influence of logic), for Aristotle, as opposed to analytical reasoning (which applies to the pure rational sciences). In Perelman’s words, dialectical reasoning: to rule out certain decisions as unreasonable, but almost never get to show in a dispute that the desired solution is the only reasonable one.

There conclusion drawn from the differences, the dialectical method is influenced by Aristotelian logic, to allow the deduction of hypotheses about the Justice for best picture or not HUMBERTO ECO PERELMAN, however, I believe there early Similar justice mathematical principles that, if implemented, would result in solutions always fair. Even reality shows. In an attempt to explain what happens, emphasizes rhetoric as a way of deposit of argumentative techniques, already proven and assimilated by the body social (code solutions), another method would be the rhetorical technique gate, would A

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6