Justicia y democracia deliberativa. Las tensiones del marco de la justicia

The question of the framework of justice—how to determine who is bound by obligations of justice—is crucial. Here the answers offered by several authors are analyzed, mainly Benhabib, Forst, Fraser and Young, who, from the perspective of deliberative democracy, give special relevance to the injustice of domination. It is argued that these philosophers introduce contradictory demands of closure and openness to the framework of justice. To overcome the injustice of domination, those subjected to a normative structure must be its authors, thus requiring closure of the demos as a whole. But the deliberative version of democracy demands openness to anyone who wishes to participate in the deliberation. This tension shows the relevance of distinguishing between justice and justification.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Tópicos Revista de Filosofía
Published
2025-04-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.21555/top.v720.2841
Primary Topic
Comparative constitutional jurisprudence studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Justicia y democracia deliberativa. Las tensiones del marco de la justicia

Francisco Blanco Brotons
Tópicos Revista de Filosofía
Comparative constitutional jurisprudence studies
article

Justicia y democracia deliberativa. Las tensiones del marco de la justicia

Francisco Blanco Brotons
article en

Abstract

The question of the framework of justice—how to determine who is bound by obligations of justice—is crucial. Here the answers offered by several authors are analyzed, mainly Benhabib, Forst, Fraser and Young, who, from the perspective of deliberative democracy, give special relevance to the injustice of domination. It is argued that these philosophers introduce contradictory demands of closure and openness to the framework of justice. To overcome the injustice of domination, those subjected to a normative structure must be its authors, thus requiring closure of the demos as a whole. But the deliberative version of democracy demands openness to anyone who wishes to participate in the deliberation. This tension shows the relevance of distinguishing between justice and justification.

Tópicos Revista de Filosofía(72)
Universidad Complutense de Madrid (ES)
Openalex Percentile: Top 89%
Comparative constitutional jurisprudence studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.