Moral Actors and Political Spectators: On Some Virtues and Vices of Rawls's Liberalism

G. Grandis
{"title":"Moral Actors and Political Spectators: On Some Virtues and Vices of Rawls's Liberalism","authors":"G. Grandis","doi":"10.3366/PER.2007.3.2.217","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The paper defends the theoretical strength and consistency of Rawls's constructivism, showing its ability to articulate and convincingly weave together several key ethical ideas; yet it questions the political relevance of this admirable normative architecture. After having illustrated Rawls's conception of moral agency and practical reason, the paper tackles two criticisms raised by Scheffler. First the allegation of naturalism based on Rawls's disdain of common sense ideas on desert is rebutted. It is then shown that, contrary to Scheffler's contention, Rawls takes proper account of our moral sentiments in the process of constructing his normative theory. Finally, the second criticism is assessed, namely the inability of Rawls's theory to increase consent around liberal policies. Despite disagreement with details of Scheffler's argument, it is suggested that the failure of recent normative liberal theories to have a political impact belies their inability to take into proper consideration the r...","PeriodicalId":381236,"journal":{"name":"Politics and Ethics Review","volume":"54 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Politics and Ethics Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3366/PER.2007.3.2.217","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract The paper defends the theoretical strength and consistency of Rawls's constructivism, showing its ability to articulate and convincingly weave together several key ethical ideas; yet it questions the political relevance of this admirable normative architecture. After having illustrated Rawls's conception of moral agency and practical reason, the paper tackles two criticisms raised by Scheffler. First the allegation of naturalism based on Rawls's disdain of common sense ideas on desert is rebutted. It is then shown that, contrary to Scheffler's contention, Rawls takes proper account of our moral sentiments in the process of constructing his normative theory. Finally, the second criticism is assessed, namely the inability of Rawls's theory to increase consent around liberal policies. Despite disagreement with details of Scheffler's argument, it is suggested that the failure of recent normative liberal theories to have a political impact belies their inability to take into proper consideration the r...
道德行动者与政治旁观者:罗尔斯自由主义的若干美德与罪恶
摘要本文为罗尔斯建构主义的理论力量和一致性进行了辩护,展示了罗尔斯建构主义能够清晰地、令人信服地将几个关键的伦理思想编织在一起;然而,它质疑这种令人钦佩的规范架构的政治相关性。在阐述了罗尔斯的道德能动性和实践理性的概念之后,本文讨论了舍弗勒提出的两个批评。首先,对基于罗尔斯对沙漠的常识观念的蔑视而提出的自然主义主张进行了反驳。这表明,与舍弗勒的论点相反,罗尔斯在构建他的规范理论的过程中适当地考虑了我们的道德情感。最后,对第二种批评进行了评估,即罗尔斯的理论无法增加人们对自由主义政策的认同。尽管与舍弗勒论证的细节存在分歧,但有人认为,最近的规范自由主义理论未能产生政治影响,这掩盖了它们未能适当考虑到……
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信