2004 Fiscal Year Final Research Report Summary
Self-determination and Consensus-formation in Japanese Legalizing Society
| Project/Area Number |
14320003
|
|---|
| Research Category |
Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (B)
|
| Allocation Type | Single-year Grants |
|---|
| Section | 一般 |
|---|
| Research Field |
Fundamental law
|
|---|
| Research Institution | KYOTO UNIVERSITY |
|---|
Principal Investigator |
TANAKA Shigeaki KYOTO UNIVERSITY, Graduate School of Law, Professor, 大学院・法学研究科, 教授 (90025148)
|
|---|
| Co-Investigator(Kenkyū-buntansha) |
KAWAHAMA Noboru KYOTO UNIVERSITY, Graduate School of Law, Professor, 大学院・法学研究科, 教授 (60204749)
MURANAKA Takashi KYOTO UNIVERSITY, Graduate School of Law, Professor, 大学院・法学研究科, 教授 (80210053)
KAMEMOTO Hiroshi KYOTO UNIVERSITY, Graduate School of Law, Professor, 大学院・法学研究科, 教授 (30183784)
YAMAMOTO Katsumi KYOTO UNIVERSITY, Graduate School of Law, Professor, 大学院・法学研究科, 教授 (20191398)
YAMAMOTO Keizo KYOTO UNIVERSITY, Graduate School of Law, Professor, 大学院・法学研究科, 教授 (80191401)
|
|---|
| Project Period (FY) |
2002 – 2004
|
| Keywords | self-determination / consensus-formation / legalization / liberalism / public reason |
|---|
| Research Abstract |
1 We proposed a basic framework in which self-determination rights as constitutional rights are applied to contract relationship in civil law.
2 We made clear Anglo-American case law about freedom of contract and freedom of trade in the perspective of market regulation.
3 We made clear complex relation between self-determination rights and rights to existence as the basic ideas of labor law.
4 We made clear a basic framework in which law contributes to resolving problems of self-determination and legalization in bioethical and medical ethics, and relation between professionals of care and law or ethics.
5 We presented a basic framework in terms of which pluralist rights-formation in dispute resolution system is ordered in view of self-determination and legalization problems in Japan.
6 We inquired our modern risk-society in the perspective of law and self-determination.
7 We made clear the relation between value of autonomy and perfectionist liberalism.
8 We defined the concept of freedom of choice in terms of the concept of opportunity set used in social choice theory and game theory.
9 We inquired the relation of difference principle and reciprocity in J.Rawls' theory of justice.
10 We made clear how what Rawls calls public reason is applied to law, and the limits of public reason in terms of justice of talk.
|
