Publication: Subjetivismo ético y objeción de conciencia
Loading...
Identifiers
Publication date
2018-06
Defense date
Authors
Advisors
Tutors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Instituto de Derechos Humanos Bartolomé de las Casas; Dykinson
Abstract
En este trabajo presentaré las características que diferencian la desobediencia civil y la objeción de conciencia tal y como han sido presentadas por algunos autores de orientación liberal, en particular Rawls, Raz y Gascón Abellán. Argumentaré, además, que la objeción de conciencia, concebida como una práctica fundamentada en un “derecho a la privacidad moral”, reposa en una ética
subjetivista o en una versión voluntarista de la ley natural. Posteriormente, demostraré que en ambos casos no queda claro cómo se pueden justificar las normas legales que intentan compatibilizar las reivindicaciones de los objetores con los derechos de terceros –o determinar la seriedad del compromiso ético de los objetores, evitando así las “objeciones por conveniencia”–. Finalmente, intentaré aplicar esta argumentación al caso de la objeción a la asignatura de Educación para la Ciudadanía.
In this paper, I will present the conceptual differences between civil disobedience and conscientious objection, which have been depicted by liberal authors such as J. Rawls, J. Raz and in Spain by M. Gascón Abellán. I will argue that conscientious objection, as a practice that is distinct from civil disobedience and rests on a right to “moral privacy”, finds his justification on a subjectivist ethics or on a voluntarist account of natural law. I will try to show that in both cases, it is not clear how a) to justify legal norms that tries to balance the objectors’ claims and the opposite claims of rights’ holders b) to determine the seriousness of the ethical commitment of conscientious objectors, in order to avoid the risk of encouraging self-interested forms of objections. Finally, I will apply the arguments to the case of conscientious objection to the subject Educación para la Ciudadanía.
In this paper, I will present the conceptual differences between civil disobedience and conscientious objection, which have been depicted by liberal authors such as J. Rawls, J. Raz and in Spain by M. Gascón Abellán. I will argue that conscientious objection, as a practice that is distinct from civil disobedience and rests on a right to “moral privacy”, finds his justification on a subjectivist ethics or on a voluntarist account of natural law. I will try to show that in both cases, it is not clear how a) to justify legal norms that tries to balance the objectors’ claims and the opposite claims of rights’ holders b) to determine the seriousness of the ethical commitment of conscientious objectors, in order to avoid the risk of encouraging self-interested forms of objections. Finally, I will apply the arguments to the case of conscientious objection to the subject Educación para la Ciudadanía.
Description
Keywords
Desobediencia civil, Subjetivismo ético, Educación para la Ciudadanía, Civil disobedience, Conscientious objection, Ethical subjectivism, Civic education
Bibliographic citation
Derechos y Libertades: revista de filosofía del derecho y derechos humanos, junio 2018, n. 39, pp. 205-228