In this essay I analyse Glen Newey’s reading of John Rawls liberal theory of justice. Newey specifically focuses on strategic differences between A Theory of Justice and Political Liberalism, and he acutely highlights some tensions that are intrinsic to Rawls’s justificatory framework. I share many of Newey’s concerns, primarily regarding the necessity to take into account the motivational constraints when outlining a theory of liberal justice. Against Newey, however, in the second section of the paper I clarify some aspect of Rawls’s (hidden) epistemology, in order to make sense of the role that the virtue of toleration plays within his paradigm.
Newey and Rawls in Dialogue: The Limits of Justification and the Conditions of Toleration
Federica Liveriero
2019-01-01
Abstract
In this essay I analyse Glen Newey’s reading of John Rawls liberal theory of justice. Newey specifically focuses on strategic differences between A Theory of Justice and Political Liberalism, and he acutely highlights some tensions that are intrinsic to Rawls’s justificatory framework. I share many of Newey’s concerns, primarily regarding the necessity to take into account the motivational constraints when outlining a theory of liberal justice. Against Newey, however, in the second section of the paper I clarify some aspect of Rawls’s (hidden) epistemology, in order to make sense of the role that the virtue of toleration plays within his paradigm.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
