Does Rawls (or anyone else) explicitly defend the use of humankind as the relevant range on which to run the Veil of Ignorance function?
-
-
It's interesting how cosmopolitan universalists apply Rawlsian distributive fairness args WITHOUT a particular social contract underpinning.
-
Which gets back to your original observation/question; there must be a humanist theology baked in, otherwise what is principle of exclusion?
-
The universalist Rawls honestly sounds more defensible, given the obvious issues with social contract.
-
(but i should really go back & read his actual argument before continuing to talk out my ass.)
-
As someone stupid enough to have read *all* of A Theory of Justice, I strongly recommend you don't. (If you must, read the secondary lit.)
-
Rawls is a mediocre thinker and a terrible writer to boot.
-
In 100 years, Rawls' oeuvre will be seen as a mere systematization of the post-WWII (pre-WWIII) political consensus—nothing more.
-
That sounds about right. What thinker from the this time period is your pick for someone they will be talking about?
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.