Social Philosophy and Policy 24 (1):164-186 (2007)
This paper critically assesses the “procedural” accounts of political justice set forth by John Rawls in A Theory of Justice (1971) and Robert Nozick in Anarchy, State, and Utopia (1974). I argue that the areas of agreement between Rawls and Nozick are more significant than their disagreements. Even though Nozick offers trenchant criticisms of Rawls's argument for economic redistribution (the “difference principle”), Nozick's own economic libertarianism is undermined by his “principle of rectification,” which he offers as a possible ground in practice for the application of something like the difference principle. Both Rawls's and Nozick's accounts of justice fail because of their abstraction from human nature as a ground of right. At the same time the libertarianism on which they agree in the non-economic sphere would deprive a free society of its necessary moral underpinning. Rawls and Nozick err, finally, by demanding that the policies pursued by a just society conform to theoretical formulas concocted by philosophy professors, rather than leaving room (as Lockean liberalism does) for the adjustment of policies to particular circumstances based on statesmen's prudential judgment and the consent of the governed. Particularly troubling from the perspective of a citizen seriously concerned with the advancement of justice and freedom is both thinkers' shrill denunciations of existing liberal societies for failing to conform to their particular strictures.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Some May Beg to Differ: Individual Beliefs and Group Political Claims.Martin Lipscomb - 2013 - Nursing Philosophy 14 (4):254-270.
Similar books and articles
Nozick's Reply to the Anarchist What He Said and What He Should Have Said About Procedural Rights.Helga Varden - 2009 - Law and Philosophy 28 (6):585-616.
The Separateness of Persons and Liberal Theory.Matt Zwolinski - 2008 - Journal of Value Inquiry 42 (2):147-165.
The Cambridge Companion to Nozick's Anarchy, State, and Utopia.Ralf M. Bader & John Meadowcroft (eds.) - 2011 - Cambridge University Press.
Impure Procedural Justice and the Management of Conflicts About Values.Emanuela Ceva - 2008 - Polish Journal of Philosophy 2 (1):5-22.
Libertarianism at Twin Harvard.Loren E. Lomasky - 2005 - Social Philosophy and Policy 22 (1):178-199.
Procedural Justice?: Implications of the Rawls-Habermas Debate for Discourse Ethics.Cristina Lafont - 2003 - Philosophy and Social Criticism 29 (2):163-181.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads152 ( #31,300 of 2,177,973 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #317,205 of 2,177,973 )
How can I increase my downloads?