Sverige kan ses som ett av världens mest jämställda länder. Människor kan dock inneha ambivalenta stereotyper om kvinnor, vilka kan vara sexistiska i sin karaktär. Syftet med föreliggande studie är att validera Glick och Fiskes (1996) Ambivalent Sexism skala översatt till svenska samt undersöka eventuella kopplingar mellan sexism, politisk inställning och system Justification. Undersökningsdeltagarna tog i stor utsträckning avstånd från sexistiska attityder. Hostile sexism skattades högre än benevolent sexism, vilket skulle kunna kopplas till landets strävan efter jämställdhet.

Sex equality law within the European Union is well developed and has since the Rome Treaty, given rise to several directives and other judicial acts on this matter of community law. The concepts of direct and indirect discrimination emerge from the general principles of Equal pay and Equal treatment and have been codified and amended several times until present.The lasts years, authors within the field of Equality Law has been pointing out that there is a common desire for simplification of discrimination law in Europe. The question has arisen whether this simplification could be implemented trough the introduction of a general Justification defence for direct sex discrimination.The concept of direct sex discrimination - when a person of one gender is treated less favourably, on the grounds of gender, than a person of the other gender would be treated in similar circumstances - leaves no possibilities for such Justification today. Indirect sex discrimination ? which arises from the equal application of neutral rules that shows an adverse impact on one group ? can be justified if the rule answers to true requirements of the job.Does the proposition that direct discrimination should be justified find support in the inconsistency of the present legislation? This paper will examine this and other questions concerning the wish for a general Justification defence through studies of case law from the European Court of Justice as well as differing opinions from authors within the field of equality law..

Uppsats för avläggande av filosofie kandidatexamen i Kulturvård, Trädgårdens hantverk och design, 15 hp, 2015.

In the last two decades something called ?the Eleatic Principle? has been quite frequent in philosophical literature. A wide range of philosophers have appealed to this principle when arguing for varioustheses but the principle itself has received comparatively little attention. Especially questions regarding the principle's Justificationare often ignored or only mentioned in passing. The aim of this paper is to remedy this situation somewhat by focusing on how it could be justified.In section 2 I give an overview of the various ways in which the principle has been used to clarify just what we are dealing with here.

The health care formulation of the principle of autonomy can be expressed as follows; ?you shall not treat a patient without the informed consent of the patient, or his or her lawfulsurrogate, except in narrowly defined emergencies?. The principle of beneficence refers to a moral obligation to act for the benefit of others. In heath care, the good or benefit in question is the restoration of the health of the patient. In fulfilling this obligation of beneficence, the physician sometimes intentionally overrides the patient?s preferences or actions for the purpose of benefiting the patient.

This thesis compares different Justifications of human rights with the philosophy of Axel Hägerström. Hägerström´s philosophy uses a strict logic and discards the notion of the existence of absolute values and moral right and wrong. The Justifications that are examined are those of Robert Nozick, Alan Gewirth and the postmodern view. Nozick emanates from arguments of natural law, which is rejected by Hägerström as metaphysics. Gewirths logical Justification emanates in part from moral arguments and hence differentiates from Hägerström, but it can be used for constructing a practical application of Hägerström's philosophy and thereby motivate a legislation relating to human rights.

Civil disobedience constitutes an interesting ethical phenomena in the democraticstate since the people performing it consciously brakes laws and norms in societyfor purposes they themselves judge to be morally good and just. This thesisexamines whether the phenomena of civil disobedience is justifiable in ademocratic society.In this study civil disobedience is analyzed on two levels. First the problem isanalyzed on a theoretical level in relative to the three, by us established, values:respect for the law, the will of the majority and equality. Second, civildisobedience is analyzed on a more practical level where we test our theoreticalline of argument with the help of two example groups who engages in civildisobedience. The Justification of civil disobedience is also analyzed through twoethical perspectives on acting, deontology and consequentialism.Our conclusion is that civil disobedience is justifiable on a theoretical level inrelative to the values we discuss.

This essay concerns the issue of democracy and judicial review. The main focus is on the Justification of both a positive and a negative attitude towards judicial review, and the values these Justifications are based on. The analysis is made by textual analysis of four authors with different opinions of the subject matter: Robert Dahl and Jeremy Waldron who has a negative attitude towards judicial review, and Erwin Chemerinsky and Ronald Dworkin who are positive about it. In the analysis an analytic frame is used which consists of different dimensions and aspects of the problem of democracy and judicial review. The study shows that there are important differences in democratic values between a positive and a negative Justification of judicial review.

The paper contains comment, clarification and criticism, even constructive criticism, of some theses that have been put forward by Laurence Bonjour in his In Defense of Pure Reason.It presents a concept of experience that deals with the relation between cognizer and object of experience that has a great similarity to that of Bonjour. Through analysis it is shown that the concept of a priori entails that Bonjour has two concepts of a priori, a narrow and a broad one. The narrow one is, in my own words: According to moderate rationalism a proposition p is a priori justified if and only if you apprehend that p must be true in every possible world. This doesn?t mean that Bonjour doesn?t believe in an epistemological, metaphysical and semantic realm.

The aim of this essay is to examine what happens when Veronica Roths Divergent-trilogy is read with a lutheran theological pre-understanding. Using reader-response theory and lutheran theology written for and in a post-modern context, three lutheran figures of thought are presented as one way of understanding the trilogy. The conclusion is that it is possible to reveal lutheran ideas concerning Justification, guilt, forgiveness, mercy and self-sacrificing love in the Divergent-story. .

 In his book Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language (1982) Saul Kripke claims that Wittgenstein argues for a certain form of scepticism in his book Philosophical Investigations (1953), namely a new form of philosophical scepticism, a result of Wittgenstein´s idea of language as language games. Nihilism, scepticism of meaning or of concept, constitutive scepticism are other commentators´ different names of the same phenomenon. The philosophy of Wittgenstein accounts for how our words, including the words of mathematics, have no meaning and there are no a priori justified objective facts as to what I mean about a word. We follow the rules blindly and without Justification. We are unable to find any facts against this proposal.

 In his book Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language (1982) Saul Kripke claims that Wittgenstein argues for a certain form of scepticism in his book Philosophical Investigations (1953), namely a new form of philosophical scepticism, a result of Wittgenstein´s idea of language as language games. Nihilism, scepticism of meaning or of concept, constitutive scepticism are other commentators´ different names of the same phenomenon. The philosophy of Wittgenstein accounts for how our words, including the words of mathematics, have no meaning and there are no a priori justified objective facts as to what I mean about a word. We follow the rules blindly and without Justification. We are unable to find any facts against this proposal.

 In his book Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language (1982) Saul Kripke claims that Wittgenstein argues for a certain form of scepticism in his book Philosophical Investigations (1953), namely a new form of philosophical scepticism, a result of Wittgenstein´s idea of language as language games. Nihilism, scepticism of meaning or of concept, constitutive scepticism are other commentators´ different names of the same phenomenon. The philosophy of Wittgenstein accounts for how our words, including the words of mathematics, have no meaning and there are no a priori justified objective facts as to what I mean about a word. We follow the rules blindly and without Justification. We are unable to find any facts against this proposal.

This paper concerns the freedom of speech in our democracy and the principles underlying the restrictions. The study is aimed at using a descriptive theory to provide a useful basis for analyzing a Justification of the role behind freedom of speech and its limitations. The analysis is made on the basis of the Swedish parliament debate in the form of motions and the non-governmental organization Swedish Helsinki Committee's report. The study has a focus on the law of hate speech and will be done with an idea centred analysis. On the basis of democratic theory, the central role of freedom of speech was clarified on the basis of a clear need for a reliable communication.

The aim of this essay is to examine what happens when Veronica Roths Divergent-trilogy is read with a lutheran theological pre-understanding. Using reader-response theory and lutheran theology written for and in a post-modern context, three lutheran figures of thought are presented as one way of understanding the trilogy. The conclusion is that it is possible to reveal lutheran ideas concerning Justification, guilt, forgiveness, mercy and self-sacrificing love in the Divergent-story. .