di Giovanni Turco
(Università degli Studi di Udine)

Scarica l’articolo intero >


The text focuses on the relationship between what is right and what is good, from a legal-political perspective. The latter represents an age old question – posed both by the reality of lived experience as well as by doctrinal and philosophical thought – with respect to which the jurist is inescapably compelled to pronounce himself. It is a matter of understanding both the substance of the two terms and the essential priority of one with respect to the other. In the line of modernity (notably, starting from Hobbes) both concepts are made positive and immanent. What is good becomes the outcome of what is right, and this is understood as the effect of the legislator implementing his will. The issue has recently been reconsidered by both Ross and Habermas. In classical thought the problem emerges clearly in the Republic of Plato, and then finds particular development in the treatment of Thomas Aquinas. It is subsequently dealt with by Rosmini and beyond. In this perspective, what is good, realistically intended, is the foundation, criterion and substance of what is right.