Liberalism without Perfection
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
OUP Oxford (2010)
A growing number of political philosophers favour a view called liberal perfectionism. According to this view, liberal political morality is characterised by a commitment to helping individuals lead autonomous lives and making other valuable choices. In this book Jonathan Quong rejects this widely held view and offers an alternative account of liberal political morality. Quong argues that the liberal state should not be engaged in determining what constitutes a valuable or worthwhile life nor trying to make sure that individuals live up to this ideal. Instead, it should remain neutral on the issue of the good life, and restrict itself to establishing the fair terms within which individuals can pursue their own beliefs about what gives value to their lives. The book thus defends a position known as political liberalism. The first part of the book subjects the liberal perfectionist position to critical scrutiny, advancing three major objections that raise serious doubts about the liberal perfectionist position with regard to autonomy, paternalism, and political legitimacy. The latter chapters then present and defend a distinctive version of political liberalism. In particular, Quong clarifies and develops political liberalism's central thesis: that political principles, in order to be legitimate, must be publicly justifiable to reasonable people. Drawing on the work of John Rawls, Quong offers his own interpretation of this idea, and rebuts some of the main objections that have been pressed against it. In doing so, the book offers novel arguments regarding the nature of an overlapping consensus, the structure of political justification, the idea of public reason, and the status of unreasonable persons.
|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
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Enrico Zoffoli (2012). The Place of Comprehensive Doctrines in Political Liberalism: On Some Common Misgivings About the Subject and Function of the Overlapping Consensus. Res Publica 18 (4):351-366.
François Tanguay-Renaud (2013). Criminalizing the State. Criminal Law and Philosophy 7 (2):255-284.
Jeffrey Howard (2013). Punishment, Socially Deprived Offenders, and Democratic Community. Criminal Law and Philosophy 7 (1):121-136.
Christopher Freiman (2013). Utilitarianism and Public Justification. Journal of Social Philosophy 44 (3):250-269.
Fabian Wendt (2013). Peace Beyond Compromise. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 16 (4):573-593.
Similar books and articles
Jonathan Quong (2012). Liberalism Without Perfection: Replies to Gaus, Colburn, Chan, and Bocchiola. Philosophy and Public Issues 2 (2):51-79.
Thomas M. Besch (2012). Political Liberalism, the Internal Conception, and the Problem of Public Dogma. Philosophy and Public Issues 2 (1):153-177.
Steven Wall (1998). Liberalism, Perfectionism and Restraint. Cambridge University Press.
Enzo Rossi (2013). Legitimacy, Democracy and Public Justification: Rawls' Political Liberalism Versus Gaus' Justificatory Liberalism. Res Publica (1):1-17.
Jonathan Quong (2005). Disagreement, Asymmetry, and Liberal Legitimacy. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 4 (3):301-330.
Thomas M. Besch (2013). On Political Legitimacy, Reasonableness, and Perfectionism. Public Reason 5 (1):58-74.
Glen Newey (2001). After Politics: The Rejection of Politics in Contemporary Liberal Philosophy. Palgrave.
James Boettcher (2004). What is Reasonableness? Philosophy and Social Criticism 30 (5-6):597-621.
Mitchell Avila (2007). Defending a Law of Peoples: Political Liberalism and Decent Peoples. [REVIEW] Journal of Ethics 11 (1):87 - 124.
Michael R. DePaul (1998). Liberal Exclusions and Foundationalism. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 1 (1):103-120.
Robert B. Talisse (2003). Rawls on Pluralism and Stability. Critical Review 15 (1-2):173-194.
Loren E. Lomasky (1990). But is It Liberalism? Critical Review 4 (1-2):86-105.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2012-01-31
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?