The Best and the Rest: How Ideals Mislead and Distort -- Yet Sharpen -- Comparative Evaluation


Authors
David Wiens
University of California, San Diego
Abstract
Political philosophers sometimes defend the value of idealistic normative theories by arguing that they help specify principles for evaluating feasible solutions to real-world problems. I start by showing that this defense is ambiguous between three interpretations, one of which I show to be a nonstarter. The second interpretation says (roughly) that a description of a normatively ideal society provides a benchmark from which to measure deviations from the ideal; the third says (again, roughly) that a description of a normatively ideal society can provide useful information about the evaluative criteria that we should use when comparing social possibilities. Against the second defense, I show how measuring deviations from the ideal can mislead our comparative evaluation of nonideal options. Against the third defense, I show how descriptions of an ideal society can distort our judgments when evaluating feasible solutions to real-world problems. I conclude by proposing a way to understand ideal theory that enables us to vindicate the intuition that it can help us clarify our values while still accepting my critical arguments. In short, we should view ideal theory not as a device for articulating normative judgments, but for clarifying the concepts we use to articulate such judgments.
Keywords normative evaluation  comparative justice  ideal theory  idealization
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 52,919
External links

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

The Idea of Justice.Amartya Sen - 2009 - Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Justice as Fairness: A Restatement.John Rawls (ed.) - 2001 - Harvard University Press.
Rescuing Justice and Equality.G. A. Cohen (ed.) - 2008 - Harvard University Press.
Justice as Fairness: A Restatement.C. L. Ten - 2003 - Mind 112 (447):563-566.

View all 37 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Against Ideal Guidance.David Wiens - 2015 - Journal of Politics 77 (2):433-446.
Three Failed Charges Against Ideal Theory.Eva Erman & Niklas Möller - 2013 - Social Theory and Practice 39 (1):19-44.
Kant, Justice, and the Augmentation of Ideal Theory.Sarah Williams Holtman - 1995 - Dissertation, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Can Rawls’s Non-Ideal Theory Save His Ideal Theory?Hye-Ryoung Kang - 2016 - Social Theory and Practice 42 (1):32-56.
Can Rawls’s Nonideal Theory Save His Ideal Theory?Hye Ryoung Kang - 2016 - Social Theory and Practice 42 (1):32-56.
Will the Real Principles of Justice Please Stand Up?David Wiens - 2017 - In Kevin Vallier & Michael Weber (eds.), Political Utopias: Contemporary Debates. Oxford University Press.
Assessing Ideal Theories: Lessons From the Theory of Second Best.David Wiens - 2016 - Politics, Philosophy, and Economics 15 (2):132-149.
Tragedies of Non-Ideal Theory.Robert Jubb - 2012 - European Journal of Political Theory 11 (3):229-246.
The Aim of a Theory of Justice.Martijn Boot - 2012 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 15 (1):7-21.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2018-07-16

Total views
211 ( #39,889 of 2,343,670 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
18 ( #36,316 of 2,343,670 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes