Yanci mai kyau

Daga Wikipedia, Insakulofidiya ta kyauta.
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Template:Liberalism sidebar

'Yanci mai kyau shi ne mallakar iko da albarkatu don yin aiki da 'yancin son rai a cikin mahallin al'umma mai fa'ida wanda ke sanya iyaka akan ikon mutum na yin aiki, sabanin 'yanci mara kyau, wanda shi ne 'yanci daga kamewa ko tauyewa daga ayyukan mutum. [1] [2]

Kamar yadda Wani Masani Heyman ya lura, yana da mahimmanci a fahimci ma’anonin ‘yanci guda biyu na Ishaya Berlin dangane da yanayin akida na shekarar 1950, don haka tunanin ’yanci mai kyau ya haɗa da ’yanci daga ƙaƙƙarfan waje, wanda ke haifar da fahimtar ’yanci mai kyau a cikin mahallin. na hukumar dan adam . [3] A cewar Charles Taylor, 'Yanci mai kyau shine ikon cika manufar mutum. 'Yanci mara kyau shine 'yanci daga tsoma baki daga wasu. [4]

Ma'anar tsari da hukuma sune samun tsakiyar manufar 'yanci mai kyau saboda don samun 'yanci, ya kamata mutum ya kasance cikin 'yanci daga hana tsarin zamantakewa wajen aiwatar da ' yancin kansa. A tsari, classism, jima'i, shekaru, iyawa da wariyar launin fata na iya hana 'yancin mutum. Kamar yadda tabbataccen 'yanci ya fi damuwa da mallakar hukumar zamantakewa, ana haɓaka ta ta ikon 'yan ƙasa su shiga cikin gwamnati kuma a gane muryoyinsu, bukatu, da damuwarsu kuma a yi aiki da su.

Rubutun Ishaya Berlin " Ra'ayoyi Biyu na 'Yanci " shekarata (1958) yawanci an yarda da su a matsayin farkon wanda ya zana a sarari tsakanin 'yanci mai kyau da mara kyau. [5] [6]

Bayanin[gyara sashe | Gyara masomin]

Charles Taylor ya yi aiki don warware ɗaya daga cikin batutuwan da suka raba ra'ayoyin 'tabbatacce' da 'marasa kyau' na 'yanci, kamar yadda aka bambanta su a cikin maƙalar Ishaya Berlin, sannan Kuma 'Ma'anar 'yanci biyu'. Yana ganin ba za a iya musantawa ba cewa akwai iyalai guda biyu na tunanin 'yancin siyasa.

Don haka, Taylor ya fayyace cewa a fili akwai ra'ayoyi masu gasa. Wanda ke da nufin ayyana 'yanci na musamman dangane da 'yancin kai na mutum daga tsoma baki daga wasu, ya Kuma kasance gwamnatoci, kamfanoni, ko masu zaman kansu; Hakazalika, a fili, waɗannan ra'ayoyin suna ƙalubalantar waɗanda suka yi imani cewa 'yanci yana zaune aƙalla a cikin wani ɓangare na ikon gama kai kan rayuwar gama gari.

'Yanci mara kyau ra'ayi ne wanda galibi ana amfani dashi a falsafar siyasa. Ra'ayin cewa 'yanci yana nufin samun damar yin abin da kuke so, Sannan ba tare da wani cikas na waje ba. An soki wannan ra'ayi don zama mai sauƙi kuma ba tare da la'akari da mahimmancin fahimtar kansa ba.

Taylor ya ba da shawarar cewa 'yanci mara kyau bai wuce kalmar falsafa ba kuma ana samun 'yanci na gaske lokacin da aka yi la'akari da rashin daidaiton zamantakewa da tattalin arziki. Kuma Ya ba da shawarar 'yanci mai kyau na yare a matsayin hanyar samun 'yanci mara kyau da tabbatacce, ta hanyar shawo kan rashin daidaiton da ke raba mu.

A cewar Taylor, takaita bayyana ra’ayin mutane na addini da na dabi’a ya fi muhimmanci fiye da takaita zirga-zirga a sassan kasar da ba kowa; kuma duka biyun suna da mahimmanci fiye da abubuwan da ba su da mahimmanci na sarrafa zirga-zirga. To Amma makircin Hobbesian ba shi da wuri don ra'ayi na mahimmanci. Zai ba da izini kawai don yanke hukunci kawai.

Bugu da ari, Taylor yayi jayayya cewa ra'ayin Hobbes-Bentham ba shi da kariya a matsayin ra'ayi na 'yanci. Fuskantar wannan tsari mai matakai biyu, yana da alama mafi aminci da sauƙi don dakatar da shi a matakin farko, sannan don dagewa da tabbaci cewa 'yanci lamari ne kawai na rashin cikas na waje, cewa, saboda haka, ya ƙunshi ba tare da nuna bambanci na dalili da izini ba. ka'ida babu zato na biyu na batun da wani. Wannan shine ainihin dabarun Maginot Line kuma yana da jaraba sosai; (a nan, Taylor yana magana ne akan hanyoyin da mutum zai iya “ƙarfafa” hujja). To Amma, ya yi iƙirarin wannan ba daidai ba ne, ba za mu iya kare ra'ayi na 'yancin kai wanda ba ya haɗa da aƙalla wasu bambance-bambance masu kyau game da dalili, wanda ba ya sanya wasu ƙuntatawa akan dalili a cikin abubuwan da suka dace don 'yanci, don haka wanda zai iya yin mulki. fitar da zato na biyu bisa manufa. [7]

Sabili da haka, Taylor yayi jayayya don bambanta tsakanin 'yanci mara kyau da mai kyau wanda ke nuna mahimmancin adalci na zamantakewa.

Tarihi[gyara sashe | Gyara masomin]

Ka'idar 'yanci ta Jean-Jacques Rousseau, bisa ga yadda ake samun 'yancin kai na mutum ta hanyar shiga cikin tsarin da al'ummarsu ke gudanar da ayyukansu na gama-gari a kan al'amuransu bisa ga "wadda ta gama-gari ". Wasu suna fassara The Social Contract don nuna cewa Rousseau ya yi imanin cewa 'yanci shine ikon kowane ɗan ƙasa don yin aiki a cikin gwamnati don kawo canje-canje; Kuma wannan shine ainihin ikon mulkin kai da dimokuradiyya .[ana buƙatar hujja] ya ce, "abin sha'awa kawai shine bauta, yayin da bin doka da muka tsara kanmu shine 'yanci." [8] Ga Rousseau, wucewa daga yanayin yanayi zuwa na farar hula ya maye gurbin adalci ga ilhami yana ba ayyukansa kyawawan dabi'un da suke da su a da. [9]

GFW Hegel ya rubuta a cikin wasu daga cikin abubuwan da ya yi na falsafar dama (a cikin wani bangare da ya gabatar da manufar m dama ) amma kawai kan 'yanci a cikin m "da kuma" aikin " shine samun ainihin mu, samun 'yanci mai kyau [10]

Misalai[gyara sashe | Gyara masomin]

A cikin bayanin ingantaccen 'yanci daga Stanford Encyclopedia of Falsafa ,

A takaice dai, mutum zai iya cewa al’ummar dimokuradiyya al’umma ce mai ‘yanci domin al’umma ce mai cin gashin kanta, kuma dan wannan al’ummar yana da ‘yanci gwargwadon yadda ya shiga cikin tsarin dimokuradiyya. Amma akwai kuma aikace-aikacen ɗaiɗaikun ɗaiɗaikun ra'ayi na ingantaccen 'yanci. Misali, wani lokaci ana cewa gwamnati ta himmatu sosai wajen samar da yanayin da ya kamata daidaikun mutane su kasance masu dogaro da kansu ko kuma su kai ga gaci.

A cikin "Mayar da Kwangilar Jama'a", Ron Replogle ya yi kwatancen da ke taimakawa wajen fahimtar 'yanci mai kyau. “Tabbas, ba cin zarafi ba ne a matsayina na mutum idan ka ɗauki mukullin motata, ba tare da so ba, lokacin da na sha abin sha. Babu wani abu mai banƙyama game da yin yarjejeniya tun da farko tana ba da kulawa ta uba a cikin yanayi lokacin da ƙwarewarmu ta buɗe ga shakku." [11] A kuma wannan ma'anar, 'yanci mai kyau shine bin tsarin ƙa'idodin da duk bangarorin da abin ya shafa suka amince da su, waɗanda dukkansu dole ne su yarda da kowane canji ga ƙa'idodin. Don haka, ingantaccen 'yanci falsafar ɗan kwangila ce.[ana buƙatar hujja]

Duk da haka, Ishaya Berlin ya yi adawa da duk wata shawara cewa uba da 'yancin walwala na iya zama daidai. Ya bayyana cewa za a iya amfani da kyakkyawar ’yanci ne kawai a lokacin da za a cire ’yanci daga mutum yana neman wani zaɓi ne da kansa ya yi, ba ƙa’idar gamayya ta al’umma ko ra’ayin wani ba. Idan mutum ya cire mukullin motar direba ba tare da son ransa ba saboda ya sha da yawa, wannan ya zama 'yanci mai kyau kawai idan direban ya yanke shawarar da ya dace da ra'ayin kansa, Kuma tun da farko cewa ba za su tuƙi a bugu ba. Don haka, ta hanyar cire maɓallan, ɗayan ya sauƙaƙe wannan shawarar kuma ya tabbatar da cewa za a kiyaye shi ta fuskar ɗabi'a mai ban sha'awa (watau shan) direba. Ga mai cirewa don cire maɓallan idan babu irin wannan niyya da direba ya bayyana, shiyasa saboda mai cirewa yana jin cewa direban bai kamata ya tuƙi bugu ba, ubanci ne, kuma ba tabbataccen 'yanci ta ma'anar Berlin ba. [12]

Erich Fromm yana ganin banbance tsakanin nau'ikan 'yanci guda biyu da ke fitowa tare da juyin halittar dan adam nesa ba kusa ba daga aikin ilhami wanda ke nuna kananan sifofin dabbobi. Wannan fanni na 'yanci, in ji shi, "ba a nan ana amfani da shi ba a ma'anarsa mai kyau na 'yanci don' amma a cikin mummunan ma'anar 'yanci daga', wato 'yanci daga ƙaddarar basirar ayyukansa." [13] Ga Fromm, 'yanci daga ilhami na dabba a fakaice yana nuna cewa rayuwa yanzu ya dogara ne akan wajabcin tsara tafarki na mutum. Kuma Ya danganta wannan bambanci ga labarin Littafi Mai Tsarki na korar mutum daga Adnin :

'Yanci mai kyau, ya kiyaye kuma, ya zo ta hanyar tabbatar da daidaituwa tare da rabuwa daga duka: "ƙantawa tare da dukan mutane", haɗin kai ba ta hanyar ilhami ko ƙayyadaddun dangantaka ba, amma a kan 'yancin da aka kafa akan dalili. [14]

Duba wasu abubuwan[gyara sashe | Gyara masomin]

  • 'Yancin juna
  • Hakkoki mara kyau da tabbatacce
  • 'Yanci na gaske
  • Yi mulki bisa ga babbar doka
  • <i id="mwdg">Tarkon</i> (jerin shirin talabijin)

Manazarta[gyara sashe | Gyara masomin]

Ci gaba da karatu[gyara sashe | Gyara masomin]

  1. Berlin, Isaiah. Four Essays on Liberty. 1969.
  2. Steven J. Heyman, "Positive and negative liberty." Chicago-Kent Law Review. 68 (1992): 81-90. online
  3. Steven J. Heyman, "Positive and negative liberty." Chicago-Kent Law Review. 68 (1992): 81-90. online
  4. Charles Taylor, “What’s Wrong With Negative Liberty,” in Philosophy and the Human Sciences: Philosophical Papers, vol. 2 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985), 211–29.
  5. Eric Nelson, "Liberty: One or Two Concepts Liberty: One Concept Too Many?." Political theory 33.1 (2005): 58-78.
  6. Bruce Baum and Robert Nichols, (eds.), Isaiah Berlin and the Politics of Freedom: ‘Two Concepts of Liberty’ 50 Years Later, (Routledge, 2013).
  7. Charles Taylor, “What’s Wrong With Negative Liberty,” in Philosophy and the Human Sciences: Philosophical Papers, vol. 2 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985), 211–29.
  8. Rousseau as quoted by Replogle, Ron. Recovering the Social Contract. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. (1989), p. 105.
  9. Michael Rosen, Jonathan Wolff, Catriona McKinnon (eds.), Political Thought, Oxford University Press, 1999, p. 63.
  10. George Klosko, History of Political Theory: An Introduction: Volume II: Modern (2nd ed.), Oxford University Press, 2013, p. 465: "we should note that Hegel's realization of the distance between his own and the traditional liberal conception of freedom, which he calls "abstract freedom," is clear in his embrace of positive freedom [in PR §149A]".
  11. Replogle, Ron. Recovering the Social Contract. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. (1989). p. 164.
  12. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named autogenerated2
  13. Erich Fromm, The Fear of Freedom (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd., 1966), p. 26.
  14. Erich Fromm, The Fear of Freedom, p. 29.