Procedural justice?: Implications of the Rawls-Habermas debate for discourse ethics

Philosophy and Social Criticism 29 (2):163-181 (2003)
Abstract
In this paper I focus on the discussion between Rawls and Habermas on procedural justice. I use Rawls’s distinction between pure, perfect, and imperfect procedural justice to distinguish three possible readings of discourse ethics. Then I argue, against Habermas’s own recent claims, that only an interpretation of discourse ethics as imperfect procedural justice can make compatible its professed cognitivism with its proceduralism. Thus discourse ethics cannot be understood as a purely procedural account of the notion of justice. Finally I draw the different consequences that follow from this reading.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1177/0191453703029002143
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history
Request removal from index
Download options
Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 26,769
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Dissent, Criticism, and Transformative Political Action in Deliberative Democracy.Christian Rostbøll - 2009 - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 12 (1):19-36.
The Ideal and Reality of Epistemic Proceduralism.James Gledhill - 2015 - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy:1-22.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2009-01-28

Total downloads

106 ( #46,344 of 2,158,901 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

3 ( #132,309 of 2,158,901 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.

Other forums