Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Vlad Tarko - Ce este libertatea?
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Introducing the official SlideShare app

Stunning, full-screen experience for iPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Vlad Tarko - Ce este libertatea?

916
views

Published on

Prezentarea de la workshopul CADI din 1 aprilie 2011.

Prezentarea de la workshopul CADI din 1 aprilie 2011.


0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
916
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Ceestelibertatea?
    VladTarko
  • 2. Doua perspective
    Exista o intelegere “corecta” a libertatii – mizapolitica a discutieidesprelibertate:
    Intelegerealibertatii => anumiteopiniipolitice
    Libertatea are maimultecoordonate:
    care sunt partial complementare
    carora le dam prioritatidiferite
    Diferitioameniprioritizeazadiferit => mizapolitica a discutiei se pastreaza
    2
  • 3. Istoriaintelegeriilibertatii
    O abordareistoricafavorizeazaperspectiva “libertatea are maimultecoordonate”
    Exemple de autori:
    Orlando Patterson (1992), Freedom, Vol. 1: Freedom in the Making of Western Culture
    Quentin Skinner (1998), Liberty before Liberalism
    David Schmidtz and Jason Brennan (2010), A Brief History of Liberty
    3
  • 4. Coordonateleconceptului de libertate
    Libertatea de constrângeri (libertatea negativă);
    Libertatea sub lege – opusul stării în care ne aflăm la cheremul deciziilor arbitrare ale anumitor persoane;
    Libertatea politică(independenţa politicăsidemocraţia) – capacitatea de a determina conţinutul regulilor la care suntemsupusi;
    Libertatea de alegere – abundenţa de opţiuni, opusul rarităţii;
    Autonomia(libertatea psihologică) – opusul manipulării;
    Toleranţa– lipsa costurilor semnificative asociate exprimarii identităţii de grup şi protecţia de care se bucură un asemenea grup (apărarea diversităţii);
    Bunăstarea– cantitatea de bunuri şi servicii de care ne bucurăm.
    4
  • 5. Cum se leagaintreelecoordonatelelibertatii?
    Douaabordari:
    Negativa -> Domnialegii -> Democratie -> Bunastare -> Libertate de alegere
    (Toleranta & Autonomianeglijatesau considerate preocuparipoliticeilegitime)
    Negativa + Autonomie -> Domnialegii -> Democratie -> Bunastare (-> Libertate de alegere) + Toleranta
    5
  • 6. Cum se leagaintreelecoordonatelelibertatii?
    Douaabordari:
    Negativa -> Domnialegii -> Democratie -> Bunastare -> Libertate de alegere
    (Toleranta & Autonomianeglijatesau considerate preocuparipoliticeilegitime)
    Negativa + Autonomie -> Domnialegii -> Democratie -> Bunastare (-> Libertate de alegere) + Toleranta
    6
  • 7. Libertatea de constrangeri
    “I am normally said to be free to the degree to which no man or body of men interferes with my activity. Political liberty in this sense is simply the area within which a man can act unobstructed by others. If I am prevented by others from doing what I could otherwise do, I am to that degree unfree; and if this area is contracted by other men beyond a certain minimum, I can be described as being coerced, or, it may be, enslaved.” (Berlin)
    Dacalimiteleconstrangeriisunt bine definite
    “the difference between aggression and defence to be recognized” (Popper)
    obtinemideea de piatalibera (Friedman, Buchanan).
    7
  • 8. Problema cu conceptul de libertatenegativa
    “Coercion ... cannot be altogether avoided because the only way to prevent it is by the threat of coercion.” (Hayek)
    Incercari de rezolvare a problemei:
    Drepturinaturale (Nozick, Rothbard): drepturileexista in sine, sinu in virtuteaunornormesiaranjamentesociale => societateapoate fi criticatapentrucaincalcaacestepresupusedrepturiobiective.
    Egalitatealibertatii (Kant, Spencer, Mill etc.): o ideeintuitivadargreu de operationalizat
    Libertateasub lege(Buchanan etc.): drepturile nu sunt “naturale” sau “obiective”, ci exista in virtuteaunui “contract social” implicit si, in plus, a negocierilorintreparti
    Libertateapsihologica (existentialistii, darsi Hayek!): definitiacoercitieidoar in sensulagresiuniifiziceesteprearestransa; conceptul de coercitietrebuieintelesintr-un sensmailarg
    8
  • 9. Ideea de drepturinaturale
    “Liberty is the absence of physically coercive interference or invasion of an individual's person and property.”
    “ownership titles are ‘distributed’, where, in short, no man's property in his person or in tangibles is molested, violated, or interfered with by anyone else. But this means that absolute freedom, in the social sense, can be enjoyed … by every man in any society, no matter how complex or advanced.” (Rothbard)
    Problema:
    Conceptulinsusi de “coercitie”, distinctiadintre “agresiune” si “aparare”, e foartegreu de definitclar (vedetiDukeminier et al., Property pentrudescriereamultorcazurireale din justitie)
    Frauda nu presupuneinitiereafortei (cf. definitiei de maisus) sitotusi e inacceptabila => ideea de contract nu poatefi fundamentaastfel, ci e un concept suplimentar
    Diferentadintrefrauda, manipularesieroare e fuzzy:
    Frauda: promiticevasi nu respectipromisiunea
    Manipulare: ma lasi in mod intentionatsa cred ca-mi promiticeva (sa se subinteleagaceva), dar de faptpromitialtceva
    Eroare: eu cred in mod gresitca mi-aipromisceva, candtu mi-aipromis de faptaltceva (si n-aiavutintentia de a ma induce in eroare)
    9
  • 10. La ce conduce eseculabordarii de tip “drepturinaturale”
    Relativismulnormelor:
    Existaintotdeaunaregulisociale de delimitare a “agresiunii” de “aparare”, dar nu exista meta-criteriiobiectivedespremodalitatea “corecta” de delimitare.
    Ceeste “coercitie”
    difera de la societate la societatesi
    diversioameni au opiniidiferite in aceastaprivinta.
    E.g. neclaritateaideii de “tulburare a linistii/ordiniipublice”
    Totusi:
    Existacriteriidespre cum trebuiesa fie procesul de selectare a normelorsi de definire a drepturilor, i.e. existaprocese de alegerecolectivalegitimesirespectivilegitime.
    10
  • 11. Egalitatealibertatiisilibertatea sub lege
    Acceptamca nu poate fi eliminatacoercitiadarimpunemanumiteconditiiasuprafelului in care poate fi exercitata in mod legitim:
    Trebuiesadecurga din reguliprestabilite – forta nu trebuiesa se manifestediscretionar
    Regulile nu trebuiesa fie scrise “cu dedicatie”, i.e. trebuiesa fie nedistriminatorii (aceleasiregulipentrutoti)
    Altfelpusaproblema: putereaautoritatilortrebuielimitata.
    Definirea “spatiuluiprivat” unde “tot ce nu-i interzis explicit e permis”
    Stipulareaexhaustiva a puterilorautoritatilorcarora “tot ce nu le estepermis explicit, le esteinterzis”
    11
  • 12. Cum facemcaregulilesa fie bune?
    Separareaputerilor in stat
    “The fundamental threat to freedom is power to coerce, be it in the hands of a monarch, a dictator, an oligarchy, or a momentary majority. The preservation of freedom requires the elimination of such concentration of power to the fullest possible extent and the dispersal and distribution of whatever power cannot be eliminated – a system of checks and balances.” (Friedman)
    Democratie
    “To govern oneself, to obey laws that one has chosen for oneself, to be self-determining, is a desirable end. … [T]o live in association with others necessarily requires that [people]must sometimes obey collective decisions that are binding on all members of the association. The problem, then, is to discover a way by which the members of an association may make decisions binding on all and still govern themselves. Because democracy maximizes the opportunities for self-determination among the members of an association, it is the best solution.” (Dahl)
    12
  • 13. Care estescopulultim al regulilor? Bunastarea
    Bunastare = cat maimultabogatie = oameniisaaibaacces la cat maimultebunurisiserviciipe care le doresc.
    Analiza cost-beneficii a legilor
    Relativlimitatadatoritacomplexitatiisituatieisi a dificultatiiidentificariiefectelorneintentionate
    Evolutionismul legal
    Descentralizaresiexperimentareinstitutionala
    Superioritateadreptuluicutumiar
    Libertatea de alegere
    13
  • 14. Subiectivitateapreferintelorsilibertatea de alegere
    Cum asiguribunastareadacapreferintelesuntsubiective?
    Raspuns: crestinumarul de optiunipe care oamenii le au si-i lasipeeisaaleagasinguri.
    Daca ne intoarcem la regulisilegi:
    In locsa ne intrebam
    1. “De cebunurisiservicii au oameniinevoie?” sau “Care-i moduloptim de furnizare a serviciului X?”
    ne intrebam
    2. “Celegisporesclibertatea de alegere?”
    “Maximizarealibertatii de alegere a omuluiobisnuit” = un criteriu general de abordare a analizeioricareipoliticipublice.
    14
  • 15. Cum se leagaintreelecoordonatelelibertatii?
    Douaabordari:
    Negativa -> Domnialegii -> Democratie -> Bunastare -> Libertate de alegere
    (Toleranta & Autonomianeglijatesau considerate preocuparipoliticeilegitime)
    Negativa + Autonomie -> Domnialegii -> Democratie -> Bunastare (-> Libertate de alegere) + Toleranta
    Autonomie -> Domnialegii
    Autonomie -> Toleranta
    15
  • 16. Autonomia, abordareapsihologica a conceptului de coercitie
    “By ‘coercion’ we mean such control of the environment or circumstances of a person by another that, in order to avoid greater evil, he is forced to act not according to a coherent plan of his own but to serve the ends of another.” (Hayek)
    Conform acesteidefinitiifraudasimanipulareadevinsieleforme de coercitie.
    De aici Hayek deduce necesitatealibertatii sub lege:
    Dacarezultateleaplicariilegiisuntimpredictibilecelor care o fac (legiuniversale, dreptateprocedurala), atuncilegeavaprotejaautonomiaindivizilor.
    Numaiastfellegile nu suntunelte de control siingineriesociala, iarcetatenii nu suntmanipulatisaactionezepentrurealizareaunor “scopurisociale” stabilite de autoritati (e.g. politicile de crestere a natalitatii).
    16
  • 17. Ideea de “autenticitate”: Autonomiasilibertatea de alegere
    Nu oricecrestere a numarului de optiuniesterelevanta, dacaoptiunilesunttoateproaste.
    Dewey: relevanta e “crestereapotentialului” uneipersoane.
    Critica de stangaa consumerismuluisau a actiunilorcorporatiilor in lumeatreia.
    Preamulteoptiuni pot genera confuziesi e casi cum n-ar fi
    exemple date de Sunstein & Thaler in Nudge
    Optiunilesuntrelevantedoardaca nu suntprezentate manipulator.
    Si Milton Friedman acceptaasta: “The possibility of co-ordination through voluntary co-operation rests on the elementary - yet frequently denied - proposition that both parties to an economic transaction benefit from it, provided the transaction is bi-laterally voluntary and informed. Exchange can therefore bring about co-ordination without coercion.”
    17
  • 18. De la autonomie la toleranta
    Democratiapoateveni in contradictie nu numai cu libertateanegativa, ci si cu dorintaminoritatilor de a-simanifesta public apartenenta la grup.
    Criticaseparariidintre “spatiuprivat” / “spatiu public”:
    Anumiteforme private de intolerantasidiscriminare pot sa nu fie acceptabilepentrucaobligamembriiminoritatilorsa se comporteneautentic (sa-siascundasausarenunte la identitateape care o au).
    Definirea “spatiului public” exclusivprinpreferintelemajoritatiiesteintolerantafata de grupuriledefavorizate (e.g. asemeniheterosexualilor, homosexualiivorsieisa se poatasarutasi in public, nu doar in privat).
    18
  • 19. Cum se leagaintreelecoordonatelelibertatii?
    Douaabordari:
    Negativa -> Domnialegii -> Democratie -> Bunastare -> Libertate de alegere
    (Toleranta & Autonomianeglijatesau considerate preocuparipoliticeilegitime)
    Negativa + Autonomie -> Domnialegii -> Democratie -> Bunastare (-> Libertate de alegere) + Toleranta
    In ciudaacestorlegaturisicomplementaritatiexistacazuri in care apar trade-off-uriintrefiecare 2 concepte.
    Celesapteconcepte nu suntdecireductibileunul la altul.
    19
  • 20. Structurareaunordezbateriimportante (1/2)
    Binelecomun
    Individualism
    Negativa
    Autonomie
    Libertatea de alegere
    Bunastare
    Comunitarianism
    Democratie
    Egalitatea in fata legii
    Toleranta
    Libertarianism
    Negativa
    Pozitiva
    Autonomie
    Libertatea de alegere
    Bunastare
    20
  • 21. Structurareaunordezbateriimportante (2/2)
    Dreptateasociala
    Proceduri
    Negativa
    Autonomie
    Democratie
    Egalitate in fata legii
    Rezultate
    Numar de optiuni
    Bunastare
    Toleranta
    Stanga vs. Dreapta
    Conservatori
    Negativa
    Libertatea sub lege
    Libertatea de alegere
    Progresisti
    Autonomie
    Democratie
    Bunastare
    Toleranta
    21