The Journal of Ethics

, 15:227

Interpreting Rawls: An Essay on Audard, Freeman, and Pogge

Article
  • 299 Downloads

Abstract

This review essay on three recent books on John Rawls’s theory of justice, by Catherine Audard, Samuel Freeman, and Thomas Pogge, describes the great boon they offer serious students of Rawls. They form a united front in firmly and definitively rebuffing Robert Nozick’s libertarian critique, Michael Sandel’s communitarian critique, and more generally critiques of “neutralist liberalism,” as well as in affirming the basic unity of Rawls’s position. At a deeper level, however, they diverge, and in ways that, this essay suggests, go astray on subtle questions of interpretation: Freeman overemphasizes reciprocity, Pogge miscasts Rawls as a consequentialist, and Audard exaggerates the Kantian aspect of Rawls’s core, continuing commitment to “doctrinal autonomy.”

Keywords

Rawls, John Audard, Catherine Freeman, Samuel Pogge, Thomas Justice Reciprocity Consequentialism Autonomy 

References

Principal Works Discussed

  1. Audard, Catherine. 2007. John Rawls. Stocksfield: Acumen.Google Scholar
  2. Freeman, Samuel. 2007b. Rawls (trans: Kosch, M.). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Pogge, Thomas. 2007. John Rawls: His life and theory of justice (trans. Michelle Kosch). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Otherwise unattributed page references in the text are to one of these three books. Where necessary, these will be preceded by P, A, or F, to indicate which of the three works is being cited.Google Scholar

Other References

  1. Ackerman, Bruce. 1994. Political liberalisms. Journal of Philosophy 91: 364–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson, Elizabeth. 1999. What is the point of equality? Ethics 109: 287–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barry, Brian. 1979. On editing Ethics. Ethics 90: 1–6.Google Scholar
  4. Barry, Brian. 1995. John Rawls and the search for stability. Ethics 105: 874–915.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bohman, James, and Henry S. Richardson. 2009. Liberalism, deliberative democracy, and “reasons that all can accept”. Journal of Political Philosophy 17: 253–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cohen, G.A. 2008. Rescuing justice and equality. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  7. DePaul, Michael. 1988. The problem of the criterion and coherence methods in ethics. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 18: 67–86.Google Scholar
  8. Douglass, R.B., G.R. Mara, and H.S. Richardson. 1990. Liberalism and the good. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Estlund, David. 1996. The survival of egalitarian justice in John Rawls’s Political liberalism. Journal of Political Philosophy 4: 68–78.Google Scholar
  10. Estlund, David. 1998. The insularity of the reasonable. Ethics 108: 252–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Freeman, Samuel (ed.). 2003. The Cambridge companion to Rawls. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Freeman, Samuel. 2007a. Justice and the social contract: Essays on Rawlsian political philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Hampton, Jean. 1980. Contracts and choices: Does Rawls have a social contract theory? Journal of Philosophy 77: 315–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. McCarthy, Thomas. 1994. Kantian constructivism and reconstructivism: Rawls and Habermas in dialogue. Ethics 105: 44–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Nozick, Robert. 1974. Anarchy, state, and utopia. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  16. Okin, Susan Moller. 1989. Reason and feeling in thinking about justice. Ethics 99: 229–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. O’Neill, Onora. 2003. Constructivism in Rawls and Kant. In The Cambridge companion to Rawls, ed. Samuel Freeman, 347–367. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Pogge, Thomas. 1994. John Rawls. Munich: Beck Verlag. [In German.].Google Scholar
  19. Pogge, Thomas. 2002. World poverty and human rights: Cosmopolitan responsibilities and reforms. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  20. Rawls, John. 1971, rev. ed. 1999. A theory of justice. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press. References will use the abbreviation TJ, giving the pages in both editions. Page numbers preceded by ‘rev.’ refer to the 1999 edition, those without that prefix to the 1971 edition.Google Scholar
  21. Rawls, John. 1980. Kantian constructivism in moral theory. Journal of Philosophy 77: 515–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Rawls, John. 1985. Justice as fairness: Political not metaphysical. Philosophy & Public Affairs 14: 223–252.Google Scholar
  23. Rawls, John. 1989. The domain of the political and overlapping consensus. New York University Law School 64: 233–255.Google Scholar
  24. Rawls, John. 1996. Political liberalism, rev. ed. New York: Columbia University Press. To be cited as PL. (The revised edition preserved the contents and pagination of the first edition of 1993, but added material in the front matter and at the end).Google Scholar
  25. Rawls, John. 1999a. Collected papers, ed. S. Freeman. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. To be cited as CP.Google Scholar
  26. Rawls, John. 1999b. The law of peoples. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Rawls, John. 2000. Lectures on the history of moral philosophy, ed. B. Herman. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Rawls, John. 2001. Justice as fairness: A restatement. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Rawls, John. 2007. Lectures on the history of political philosophy, ed. S. Freeman. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Rawls, John. 2009. A brief inquiry into the meaning of sin and faith, ed. T. Nagel. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Raz, Joseph. 1990. Facing diversity: The case for epistemic abstinence. Philosophy & Public Affairs 19: 3–47.Google Scholar
  32. Reidy, David. 2007. Reciprocity and reasonable disagreement: From liberal to democratic legitimacy. Philosophical Studies 132: 243–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Richardson, Henry S. 2005. ‘Rawls, John’, an entry in the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy [online]. Available at http://www.iep.utm.edu/r/rawls.htm. Accessed 16 April 2009.
  34. Richardson, Henry S. 2006. Rawlsian social contract theory and the severely disabled. Journal of Ethics 10: 419–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sandel, Michael. 1982, 2nd ed. 1998. Liberalism and the limits of justice. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. To be cited as LLJ, using only the pagination of the first edition except as noted.Google Scholar
  36. Scanlon, T.M. 1982. Contractualism and utilitarianism. In Utilitarianism and beyond, ed. Amartya Sen, and Bernard Williams, 103–128. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sen, Amartya. 1980. Equality of what? In The Tanner lectures in human values, I, ed. S. McMurrin, 195–220. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Singer, Brent. 1988. An extension of Rawls’s Theory of justice to environmental ethics. Environmental Ethics 10: 217–231.Google Scholar
  39. Walzer, Michael. 1984. Spheres of justice. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  40. Wenar, Leif. 2004. The unity of Rawls’s work. Journal of Moral Philosophy 1: 265–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Georgetown UniversityWashingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations