Rawls, Political Liberalism and Reasonable Faith

Weithman, Paul

doi:10.1017/cbo9781316551646

Cited by 47 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 64 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…After Rawls's death, the thesis was published by Thomas Nagel (Rawls 2009). The commentators of that volume (Cohen and Nagel, Adams, in Rawls 2009), together with recent commentators (Weithman 2016;Nelson 2019), all converge on one point: the theological ideas of the young Rawls remained in the background of the political philosophy of the mature Rawls. Among those ideas, we highlight Rawls's critique of Pelagian heresy in favor of an Augustinian account, 2 which, in turn, is connected to mature Rawls's critique of merit and meritocracy.…”

Section: The Augustinian Rawls and His Critique Of Meritocracymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Illusion of Merit and the Demons of Economic Meritocracy: Which are the Legitimate Expectations of the Market?

Bruni

Santori

2021

J Bus Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Meritocracy is gaining momentum in public discourse, being close to the determinants of people's demand of social justice (equality of opportunity, social mobility). Conversely, in Academia meritocracy is the object of harsh critiques. The meritocratic rhetoric brings people to overlook the factors which contributed to their success (unequal starting conditions, luck) over their individual actions, legitimating socioeconomic inequalities. Recently, it has been argued that market-driven societies foster the problems related to meritocracy. The concept of merit, conceived as the value of the individual contribution to the common good of society, is absorbed by market value. While we share the concerns on meritocracy, we question the idea that those are necessarily connected to the market sphere. To prove that, our paper digs in the theological roots of the concept of merit to better understand meritocracy. We inquire Pelagius-Augustine debate on human merit and salvation, and its influence on Rawls's critique of meritocracy. We base on the "Augustinian" Rawls our argument that market is not a meritocratic domain, but that in market there is space for merit conceived as 'legitimate expectations.' Our aim is to prove that merit can find some space in market societies without incurring in the problems of meritocracy. Keywords Merit • Market • Augustine • Pelagius • Rawls • Hayek "The ideas in the minds of men correspond to the word merit, shall, as everyone knows, be infinitely different: they change the subject, grade, purpose, measuring not only between nations and peoples, but likewise between classes and classes of the same city" (Melchiorre Gioja, Del Merito e Delle Ricompense). "Success is an ugly thing. Men are deceived by its false resemblances to merit.... They confound the brilliance of the firmament with the star-shaped footprints of a duck in the mud" (Victor Hugo, Les Misérables).

show abstract

Section: The Augustinian Rawls and His Critique Of Meritocracymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Illusion of Merit and the Demons of Economic Meritocracy: Which are the Legitimate Expectations of the Market?

Bruni

Santori

2021

J Bus Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In light of such unapologetically dogmatic pronouncements, even authors strongly in favor of his "political liberalism" (see Nussbaum, 2007, p. 6), became chary (cf. the apologetic view of Weithman, 2016). With good reason: Rejecting the direct implementation of certain moral and metaphysical convictions as raison d'état is one thing (Larmore, 1997), excluding all such worldviews as participants from the public discourse quite another (Habermas, 1995).…”

Section: Rel Ativis M or Dog Matis M?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Drop Rawls?

Dierksmeier¹

2021

Business Ethics Env & Resp

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Business ethicists disagree on whether John Rawls's political philosophy can be applied to their questions and concerns. They concur, however, that, if warranted, such an application of his theory would be highly instructive for the field. This article scrutinizes that assumption. The paper examines to what extent a normative import of Rawls's philosophy into business ethics would indeed render adequate results. Highlighting shortcomings of Rawls in regard to several pressing concerns of contemporary business ethics, the paper ponders whether, for purposes of normative guidance and conceptual orientation, Rawls's theory can meet the expectations that its adherents foster.

show abstract

“…Rawls and other political liberals believe that thick ethical and cultural beliefs held by parties to the dialogue should be privatised in the sense that they should not be considered the basic subject matter of discussion. Individuals debate political issues through a process of political dialogue as informed members of particular communities, possessing interests and ideals and motivations which will be shaped by the memberships they possess and the obligations these memberships confer (Nussbaum, 1999; Rawls, 1993; Weithman, 2016). The fact that citizens will often belong to identity-conferring communities, that these communities often play a central role in shaping their ethical beliefs and that these facts will give rise to deep diversity is the starting point of Rawls’s argument for political liberalism (Rawls, 1993).…”

Section: Political Liberalism As Realistic Moralism: the Strategy Of mentioning

confidence: 99%

When the people are not reasonable: Multiculturalism and realistic normative theory in the contemporary era

Parvin

2019

Ethnicities

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this piece, I offer an original and fundamental critique of a range of approaches to multiculturalism that have dominated the field of Anglo-American political theory since first-wave debates conducted in the 1990s/2000s. I suggest that the politics of the early twenty-first century, and especially the widespread rise of anti-immigrant and anti-minority sentiments among citizens of liberal democratic states throughout the world, requires political theorists who seek feasible solutions to real-world political problems to reject these theories. I focus on two approaches in particular: political liberalism and the politics of difference. Neither offers a vision of politics that is tenable in the early twenty-first century, I argue, as they both require citizens to deliberate about political matters in ways that they cannot. In discussing these approaches, and finding them wanting, it is revealed that political theorists face a choice. They can present a theory which is realistic in the sense that it takes account of political reality and offers a strategy which might be used to genuinely inform a process of reform. Alternatively, they can abandon realism and also the desire to produce an operational normative theory which can resolve real problems in actually existing states. I lay out the nature and importance of this choice and explain some of its implications for the discipline and for our current political predicament. I suggest that the choice is unavoidable and that making it requires political theorists to make a more fundamental decision about the purposes of normative political theory itself.

show abstract

Rawls, Political Liberalism and Reasonable Faith

Cited by 47 publications

References 64 publications

The Illusion of Merit and the Demons of Economic Meritocracy: Which are the Legitimate Expectations of the Market?

The Illusion of Merit and the Demons of Economic Meritocracy: Which are the Legitimate Expectations of the Market?

Drop Rawls?

When the people are not reasonable: Multiculturalism and realistic normative theory in the contemporary era

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About