Working paper de Ian Shapiro (Yale) sobre o conceito de justiça como não-dominação com uma resposta de David Dyzenhaus. O professor Shapiro ministra um curso badalado de teoria política que atualmente encontra-se no Yale Open Courses: The Moral Foundations of Politics
Ian Shapiro - On non-domination
David Dyzenhaus - Response to Ian Shapiro
My aim here is to defend a view of non-domination as providing a better basis for justice than the going alternatives. I differentiate it from two kinds of alternatives: those whose proponents reject my claim that non-domination is the bedrock of justice and those who agree with me but understand non-domination differently than I do.
The first group divides into partisans of equality, on the one hand, and of freedom, on the other. Their arguments concern me in the first half of the essay. Then I turn to conceptions of non-domination put forward by Jürgen Habermas, Michel Foucault, Michael Walzer, Quentin Skinner, and Philip Pettit. There is considerable overlap among these various views and between them and mine but there are also notable disagreements. I spell out what is at stake in the alternative formulations, indicating why my own conception, rooted in power-based resourcism, is preferable.