English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The critics of the liberal theories of justice have denounce that basic assumptions of these theories such as impartiality and universalism are not realistic and involve pernicious ideological aims. Against this perspective, I sustain that only an impartial and universalistic conception of justice, based on a deliberative vision of politics and participation, could add consistently the demands of the minorities in its democratic model, and at the same time put that model on practice. I understand this impartiality in a deliberativedialogical way. In this essay I defend that impartiality, universalism and difference far from exemplify an anomalous union, make a constellation of inseparable elements, constellation that gives the sense to a truly inclusive and rigorous perspective of justice.

Justicia como imparcialidad dialógica. Una perspectiva de la justicia imparcial compatible con las demandas de los grupos desfavorecidos