The fallibility objection to the original position

Abstract

Do individuals in John Rawls’s original position take into account the fallibility of human nature? Some notable commentators on Rawls say that they do or that they should. But this enables us to say that individuals in the original position would not come to an agreement at all.

Links

PhilArchive

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

In Defense of Liberal Equality.M. E. Newhouse - 2017 - Public Reason 9 (1-2).
Human embryos in the original position?Russell Disilvestro - 2005 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 30 (3):285 – 304.
Rawls versus utilitarianism: the subset objection.Terence Rajivan Edward - 2016 - E-Logos Electronic Journal for Philosophy 23 (2):37-41.
The Original Position.Timothy Hinton (ed.) - 2015 - New York: Cambridge University Press.
How to Justify Principles of Justice.Zhang Guoqing - 2020 - Yearbook for Eastern and Western Philosophy 4 (1):163-192.
How to Justify Principles of Justice.Zhang Guoqing - 2019 - Yearbook for Eastern and Western Philosophy 2019 (4):163-192.

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-12-11

Downloads
1,026 (#13,646)

6 months
92 (#56,273)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Terence Rajivan Edward
University of Manchester (PhD)

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The Morality of Freedom.Joseph Raz - 1986 - Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press.
The Morality of Freedom.Joseph Raz - 1986 - Philosophy 63 (243):119-122.
The morality of freedom.J. Raz - 1988 - Revue Philosophique de la France Et de l'Etranger 178 (1):108-109.
Revisability and Rational Choice.Allen Buchanan - 1975 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 5 (3):395 - 408.

Add more references