Contenido principal del artículo

Autores

Kelsen wrote a book, much less known than his Reine Rechtslehre (Pure Theory of Law), called Was ist Gerechtigkeit (What is Justice), in which he attempts to show how and why several theories of justice, formulated by authors ranging from Greece to European Illuminism, are wrong. One of those concepts is Aristotle’s, as exposed in his Nichomachean Ethics. In this article, I argue that in order to show Aristotle wrong, Kelsen misinterprets his theory, then ignores the practical consequences it implies. I attempt to demonstrate that, although highly influenced by the (retrograde) mores of his time, Aristotle’s theory can be useful to us today, which Kelsen denies. Finally, I present a challenge regarding one point raised by Kelsen which is particularly hard to reply.

Arthur Cristóvão Prado, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil

Lawyer and researcher who holds a master's degree in the Department of Philosophy and General Theory of Law at the Faculty of Law of the Universidade de São Paulo, of which he graduated in Law (2015), with a semester at the Freie Universität Berlin (2013 / 14). He has worked as a federal state prosecutor since January 2015, and currently assists the Attorney General in representing the Federal Union before the Supreme Court of Brazil. His main fields of interest are political philosophy, the theory of justice, the philosophy of law, the philosophy of taxation, the law of successions, human rights and the supreme courts. He has published book chapters such as (2017) Sistema y Tópica en la Aplicação da Boa-Fé Objetiva. In A. A. Rodrigues, A. C. Prado, E. C. de Antonio Faria (Org.), Lições de Direito Público (pp. 1-190). Pará de Minas: VirtualBooks Editora, and (2017) Considerações Históricas acerca de Boa-Fé para Direito Público. In D. Soares França, G. Pereira Barbosa, L. R. Freitas de Souza (Orgs.), Contribuições Contemporâneas ao Debate Publicista (pp. 1-185). Pará de Minas: VirtualBooks Editor.

Prado, A. C. (2018). A reply to Kelsen’s critique of Aristotle’s concept of justice. Praxis Filosófica, (48), 53–67. https://doi.org/10.25100/pfilosofica.v0i48.7303
Aristotle [NE] (1906). The Nicomachean Ethics (F. H. Peters, Trans.). London, England: Trench, Trübner & co.

Aubenque, P. (1995). The twofold natural foundation of justice according to Aristotle. In R. Heinaman (Org.), Aristotle and moral realism (pp.35 - 47). London, England: UCL Press.

Bambrough, R. (1979). Aristotle on Justice: A Paradigm of Philosophy. In R. Bambrough (Ed.), New Essays on Plato and Aristotle (pp. 159-174). London, England: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Bien, G. (1995). Gerechtigkeit bei Aristoteles (V). In O. Höffe (Org.), Die Nikomachische Ethik (pp. 135-164). Berlin, Germany: Akademie Verlag.

Kelsen, H. (1975). Was ist Gerechtigkeit, 2nd ed. Vienna, Austria: Franz Deuticke.

Keyser, P. (1992). A Proposed Diagram in Aristotle EN V 3, 1131a24-b20 for Distributive Justice in Proportion. Apeiron, 25(2), 135-144.

Izhak, E. (2009). Corrective and Distributive Justice: from Aristotle to modern times. New York, U.S.A: Oxford University Press.

Weinrib, E. J. (1992). Corrective Justice. Iowa Law Review, 77(2), 403-425.

Rawls, J. (1999). A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, USA: Harvard University Press.