David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 11 (2):131-152 (2008)
Rawls?s controversial idea of public reason is often criticized for being exclusionary and unfair. Yet it is possible to read the idea of public reason as being largely innocuous, especially if one attends to all the qualifications and specifications of the idea that Rawls articulated. This essay pursues such a reading, by systematically considering each element of qualification that Rawls built into the idea of public reason. Considered together and in terms of their cumulative effect, they make the innocuous reading possible. My aim is not, however, to try to defend Rawls?s idea of public reason by claiming that it is innocuous, but to help clarify the ambiguous nature of the idea through this reading
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
John Rawls (1999). The Law of Peoples. Harvard University Press.
John Rawls (2001). Justice as Fairness: A Restatement. Harvard University Press.
John Rawls (1993). Political Liberalism. Columbia University Press.
J. Rawls (1995). Political Liberalism. Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie 57 (3):596-598.
John Rawls (1999). Collected Papers. Harvard University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
Matteo Bonotti (2014). Partisanship and Public Reason. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 17 (3):314-331.
Veit Bader & Matteo Bonotti (2014). Introduction: Parties, Partisanship and Political Theory. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 17 (3):253-266.
Michael Da Silva (2014). Public Reason and the Need to Identify State-Relevant Desert. Criminal Justice Ethics 33 (2):129-154.
Similar books and articles
Kjartan Koch Mikalsen (2010). Testimony and Kant's Idea of Public Reason. Res Publica 16 (1):23-40.
Richard M. Buck (2001). Sincerity and Reconciliation in Public Reason. Social Philosophy Today 17:21-35.
Micah Schwartzman (2004). The Completeness of Public Reason. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 3 (2):191-220.
Andrew Williams (2000). The Alleged Incompleteness of Public Reason. Res Publica 6 (2):199-211.
David Hollenbach (1994). Public Reason/Private Religion? A Response to Paul J. Weithman. Journal of Religious Ethics 22 (1):39 - 46.
David A. Reidy (2000). Rawls's Wide View of Public Reason: Not Wide Enough. Res Publica 6 (1):49-72.
Christie Hartley & Lori Watson (2009). Feminism, Religion, and Shared Reasons: A Defense of Exclusive Public Reason. Law and Philosophy 28 (5):493 - 536.
Micah Lott (2006). Restraint on Reasons and Reasons for Restraint: A Problem for Rawls' Ideal of Public Reason. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 87 (1):75–95.
James P. Sterba (1999). Reconciling Public Reason and Religious Values. Social Theory and Practice 25 (1):1-28.
Fabienne Peter (2007). Rawls' Idea of Public Reason and Democratic Legitimacy. Journal of International Political Theory 3 (1):129-143.
Added to index2010-08-10
Total downloads16 ( #239,636 of 1,934,535 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #434,193 of 1,934,535 )
How can I increase my downloads?