Does Rawls (or anyone else) explicitly defend the use of humankind as the relevant range on which to run the Veil of Ignorance function?
-
-
(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?
-
Difficult question. For the 70s & 80s, I think Parfit & the French theorists (esp. Foucault) will fare better.
-
But the 20th century as whole will be overshadowed by Wittgenstein & Nietzsche.
End of conversation
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.