3現代におけるグローバルな善・悪の概念についてカント・アレント・デリダの正義

抄録

This paper aims to explore the typical theories of “evil” in order to clarify the meanings of global justice in the contemporary age.It focuses on the following theories: Immanuel Kant’s theory of practical reason, Hannah Arendt’s banality of evil, and Jacques Derrida’s theory of justice.

Kant argues that justice resides inside of legality but is not quite the same. He contends that the existence of evil indicates that this gap between justice and legality is no longer being considered.Therefore, justice in Kant’s understanding of practical reason suggests an act of conscience and a reflection upon one’s past conducts, which presumably stays inside of legality and outside of justice. Arendt argues that the evil in the contemporary age is banal, as she found in Adolf Eichmman’s court case.In the court, she found that Eichmman was a banal and ordinary law-abiding citizen, unlike the general expectation that he would be a brutal and atrocious figure.Similar to Kant, she concludes that evil exists in acts of thoughtlessness.

The relationship between legality and justice differentiates Arendt from Kant. According to Kant’s philosophy, justice resides inside of legality, whereas Arendt states that justice can be found inside and outside of legality and thus claims that a just act sometimes takes place in the form of illegal action.

Derrida also contends that some just acts can be found outside of legality, and he regards deconstruction as justice.Therefore, his deconstructive arguments are sometimes used to criticize law and given orders for the sake of justice although his concern to justice has been often undervalued by contemporary political theorists and IR scholars.