The Ambiguity of Justice: Paul Ricoeur on Universalism and Evil

Autores/as

  • Geoffrey Dierckxsens Ph.D. in Philosophy – University of Antwerp (FWO), Fonds Ricœur (EHESS)

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5195/errs.2015.313

Palabras clave:

justice, evil, universal, universalism, norms

Resumen

In this article I will examine Ricœur’s idea of the universal in his understanding of justice. Scholars recently discussed the extent to which Ricœur understands universal moral norms and universal rules of justice in his anthropology of human action (e.g., J. Michel, Paul Ricœur: une philosophie de l’agir humain, Paris: Les Éditions du Cerf, 2006), and argue that Ricœur stresses too much the idea of universal moral norms with regard to cultural and moral diversity (e.g., G. H. Taylor, “Ricoeur versus Ricoeur? Between the Universal and the Contextual,” From Ricoeur to Action. The Socio-Political Significance of Ricoeur’s Thinking, Todd S. Mei and David Lewin (eds.), (London and New York: Bloomsbury, 2012). G. H. Taylor, “Reenvisioning Justice,” Lo Squarda 12 (2013): 65-80). In this article I will take part in the debate about universalism and approach Ricœur’s idea of the universal from a different angle, in placing it in light of his idea of evil. The point I will aim to make in this article is that Ricœur’s idea of the relation between justice and evil demonstrates what I understand as the ambiguity of justice, which highlights the difficulty of defining universal rules of justice. I will argue that this ambiguity is the following: justice aims at the establishment of social peace and in that sense it is the necessary remedy against human evil, but justice also implies power, and possibly violence, over others in that it relates to violent feelings of vengeance, to institutional mechanism of authority, and to a struggle of values. Yet if rules of justice relate to evil in the sense of power over others, so I argue, then it is problematic to define absolute criteria for rules of justice, i.e., for rules for social peace: because justice relates to particular values, which means that the risk of violence is inherent to institutional rules of justice, there is no ultimate universal set of such rules. This article therefore questions Ricœur’s understanding of universal rules of justice in Oneself as Another. Yet, I will also draw on a series of other texts of Ricœur on justice (i.a., The Lectures on Ideology and Utopia, The Just and Reflections on the Just), and argue that Ricœur’s idea of justice allows understanding how we find common sensibilities about justice through dialogue, a sensibility for the other, and narratives as a way of critique of existing moral norms and rules of justice.

Biografía del autor/a

Geoffrey Dierckxsens, Ph.D. in Philosophy – University of Antwerp (FWO), Fonds Ricœur (EHESS)

I was born in 1987, studied philosophy at the University of Antwerp, where I wrote my bachelor dissertation on the concept of eros in the work of Emmanuel Levinas in 2008. In 2009, I acquired my master’s degree and defended my thesis on ethical responsibility and erotic love in the works of Levinas and Jean-Luc Marion. My field of research includes phenomenological and existentialistic topics, such as subjectivity, singularity, ethical responsibility, the moral conscience, charity, solicitude, desire, and erotic love. I am currently working on my PhD-project about ethical responsibility and singularity, which is founded by the Research Foundation Flanders (FWO). The approach of research is based on the works of Levinas and Ricœur.

Descargas

Publicado

2016-01-19

Número

Vol. 6 Núm. 2 (2015)

Sección

Articles

Licencia


Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

    1. The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.

    2. Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.

    3. The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons 4.0 License (Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works), or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
      1. Attribution—other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
      2. Noncommercial—other users (including Publisher) may not use this Work for commercial purposes;
      3. No Derivative Works—other users (including Publisher) may not alter, transform, or build upon this Work,with the understanding that any of the above conditions can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.

    4. The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

    5. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a pre-publication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.

    6. Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.

    7. The Author represents and warrants that:

      1. the Work is the Author’s original work;
      2. the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
      3. the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
      4. the Work has not previously been published;
      5. the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
      6. the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
         
    8. The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.