Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T03:14:36.594Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

7 - History and Normativity in Political Theory: The Case of Rawls

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 December 2022

By
Richard Bourke
Edited by
Richard Bourke  and
Quentin Skinner
Richard Bourke
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge
Quentin Skinner
Affiliation:
Queen Mary University of London
Get access

Summary

John Rawls offers an instructive case study in how we have come to think about the relationship between historical conditions and moral standards in political philosophy. He is commonly taken to have rejuvenated political theory, though it makes more sense to see his work as an important development within ethics which was subsequently presented as the rebirth of political philosophy. The essence of Rawls’s thought is to be found in his construction of ideal values for whose practical viability he then argues. The venture, he claimed, was ‘realistically utopian’. But his emphasis fell on the theoretical justification of the construction rather than on the conditions of its practical viability. This parallels certain tendencies within economic theory where abstract modelling takes on a life of its own. But the nearest precedent for this procedure in the history of moral thought is Kant’s practical philosophy. Rawls saw the Kantian moral commonwealth – or kingdom of ends – as the structural equivalent of his own commitment to true democratic justice. The divergence, however, between their ideas is at least as significant as any appearance of overlap. Kant was profoundly sceptical about the moral capacities of human beings and projected his ideal as a goal to be actualised in the remotest future of a protracted world historical process. Moreover, forward momentum towards this end was to be driven by selfishness and competition rather than by an abiding devotion to the principles of justice. Rawls’s project is radically distinct from this vision. While paying scant attention to the historical conditions that might favour justice as fairness, he thought that a just regime would be realised through moral striving. Moreover, he claimed that progress since the Reformation had brought this outcome within reach.

Keywords

Rawlshistorypolitical theory
Type
Chapter
Information
History in the Humanities and Social Sciences , pp. 165 - 193
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abaci, Uygar. 2022. ‘Kant’s Enigmatic Transition: Practical Cognition of the Supersensible’ in The Sensible and Intelligible Worlds: New Essays on Kant’s Metaphysics and Epistemology, ed. Stang, Nicholas and Schafer, Karl. Oxford.Google Scholar
Arendt, Hannah. 1970. On Violence. New York.Google Scholar
Aristotle, . 1926. Nicomachean Ethics, trans. H. Rackham. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Ball, Terence. 1995. Reappraising Political Theory. Oxford.Google Scholar
Barry, Brian. 1980. ‘The Strange Death of Political Philosophy’, Government and Opposition, 15: 3–4, pp. 276–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beiser, F. C. 2014. The Genesis of Neo-Kantianism, 1796–1880. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berlin, Isaiah. 1956. ‘Equality’ in Concepts and Categories.Google Scholar
Berlin, Isaiah. 1958. ‘Two Concepts of Liberty’ in Four Essays on Liberty. Oxford.Google Scholar
Berlin, Isaiah. 1959. ‘John Stuart Mill and the Ends of Life’ in Four Essays on Liberty.Google Scholar
Berlin, Isaiah. 1960. Vico and Herder in Three Critics of Enlightenment.Google Scholar
Berlin, Isaiah. 1962. ‘Does Political Theory Still Exist?’ in Concepts and Categories.Google Scholar
Berlin, Isaiah. 1969. Four Essays on Liberty. Oxford.Google Scholar
Berlin, Isaiah. 1978. Concepts and Categories: Philosophical Essays. London.Google Scholar
Berlin, Isaiah. 2000. Three Critics of Enlightenment: Vico, Hamann, Herder. Princeton.Google Scholar
Bloch, Ernst. 1918. Geist der Utopie. Munich.Google Scholar
Blöser, Claudia. 2020. ‘Hope in Kant’ in The Moral Psychology of Hope, ed. Blöser, Claudia and Stahl, Titus. New York.Google Scholar
Bok, Mackenzie P. 2017a. ‘To the Mountaintop Again: The Early Rawls and Post-Protestant Ethics in Postwar America’, Modern Intellectual History, 14: 1, pp. 153–85.Google Scholar
Bok, Mackenzie P. 2017b. ‘“The Latest Invasion from Britain”: Young Rawls and his Community of American Ethical Theorists’, Journal of the History of Ideas, 72: 2, pp. 275–85.Google Scholar
Brooke, Christopher. 2015. ‘Rawls on Rousseau and the General Will’ in The General Will: The Evolution of a Concept, ed. Lay Williams, David and Farr, James. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Burkert, Walter. 1985. Greek Religion: Archaic and Classical. Oxford.Google Scholar
Chignell, Andrew. 2007. ‘Belief in Kant’, Philosophical Review, 116: 3, pp. 323–60.Google Scholar
Cobban, Alfred. 1953. ‘The Decline of Political Theory’, Political Science Quarterly, 67, pp. 321–37.Google Scholar
Cohen, G. A. 2008. Rescuing Justice and Equality. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Cohen, Joshua. 1986. ‘Review of Spheres of Justice’, Journal of Philosophy, 83: 8, pp. 457–68.Google Scholar
Dahl, Robert. 1956. A Preface to Democratic Theory. Chicago.Google Scholar
Darwall, Stephen L. 1976. ‘A Defense of the Kantian Interpretation’, Ethics, 86: 2, pp. 164–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darwall, Stephen L. 2006. ‘How Should Ethics Relate to (the Rest of) Philosophy?’ in Metaethics after Moore, ed. Horgan, Terry and Timmons, Mark. Oxford.Google Scholar
Dunn, John. 1985. Rethinking Modern Political Theory: Essays 1979–1983. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Dunn, John. 1996. The History of Political Theory and Other Essays. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Eich, Stefan. 2021. ‘The Theodicy of Growth: John Rawls, Political Economy, and Reasonable Faith’, Modern Intellectual History, 18: 4, pp. 984–1009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elster, Jon. 1978. Logic and Society: Contradictions and Possible Worlds. New York.Google Scholar
Fleischacker, Samuel. 2004. A Short History of Distributive Justice. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Forrester, Katrina. 2011. ‘Hope and Memory in the Thought of Judith Shklar’, Modern Intellectual History, 8:3, pp. 591–620.Google Scholar
Forrester, Katrina. 2019. In the Shadow of Justice: Postwar Liberalism and the Remaking of Political Philosophy. Princeton.Google Scholar
Gališanka, Andrius. 2019. John Rawls: The Path to a Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Gardiner, Patrick. 1955. ‘On Assenting to a Moral Principle’, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 55, pp. 23–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gauthier, David. 1986. Morals by Agreement. Oxford.Google Scholar
Gellner, Ernest. 1964. Thought and Change. London.Google Scholar
Germino, Dante. 1967. Beyond Ideology: The Revival of Political Theory. New York.Google Scholar
Geuss, Raymond. 2005. Outside Ethics. Princeton.Google Scholar
Geuss, Raymond. 2008. Philosophy and Real Politics. Princeton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Gierke, Otto. 1939. The Development of Political Theory, trans. B. Freyd. London.Google Scholar
Glazer, Nathan and Moynihan, Daniel P.. 1963. Beyond the Melting Pot: The Negroes, Puerto Ricans, Jews, Italians, and Irish of New York City. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Gleason, Philip. 1964. ‘The Melting Pot: Symbol of Fusion or Confusion?’, American Quarterly, 16, pp. 20–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gough, J. W. 1957. The Social Contract. Oxford.Google Scholar
Gregory, Eric. 2007. ‘Before the Original Position: The Neo-Orthodox Theology of the Young Rawls’, Journal of Religious Ethics, 25, pp. 179–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gutmann, Amy. 1989. ‘The Central Role of Rawls’s Theory’, Dissent, 36, pp. 338–42.Google Scholar
Hampshire, Stuart. 1984. Morality and Conflict. Oxford.Google Scholar
Handlin, Oscar. 1951. The Uprooted: The Epic Story of the Great Migration that Made the American People. Boston.Google Scholar
Hartman, Andrew. 2015. A War for the Soul of America: A History of the Culture Wars. Chicago.Google Scholar
Hawthorn, Geoffrey. 1991. Plausible Worlds: Possibility and Understanding in History and the Social Sciences. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Hegel, G. W. F. 1991 [1821]. Elements of the Philosophy of Right, ed. Wood, Allen W.. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Hegel, G. W. F. 2010 [1830]. Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences in Basic Outline, Part I: Science of Logic, trans. Klaus Brinkmann and Daniel O. Dahlstrom. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Herberg, Will. 1955. Protestant, Catholic, Jew: An Essay in American Religious Sociology. New York.Google Scholar
Higham, John. 1975. Send These to Me: Jews and Other Immigrants in Urban America. New York.Google Scholar
Hirschman, Albert O. 1991. The Rhetoric of Reaction: Perversity, Futility, Jeopardy. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Hume, David. 2000 [1739]. A Treatise of Human Nature, ed. Norton, David Fate and Norton, Mary J.. Oxford.Google Scholar
Hunter, James Davison. 1991. Culture Wars: The Struggle to Define America. New York.Google Scholar
Irwin, Terence. 1989. Classical Thought. Oxford.Google Scholar
Kallen, Horace. 1924. Culture and Democracy in the United States: Studies in the Group Psychologies of the American Peoples. New York.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel. 1900–. Kants gesammelte Schriften: Ausgabe der königlich preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften [AA]. Berlin.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel. 1992. Lectures on Logic, ed. Young, J. Michael. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel. 1996 [1793]. ‘On the Common Saying: That may be Correct in Theory, But is of no Use in Practice’ in Practical Philosophy, ed. Gregor, Mary J. and Wood, Allen. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel. 1998 [1781, rev. 1787]. Critique of Pure Reason, ed. Guyer, Paul and Wood, Allen W.. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel. 2000 [1790]. Critique of the Power of Judgment, ed. Guyer, Paul. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, Immanuel. 2007 [1784]. ‘Idea for a Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Aim’ in Anthropology, History, and Education, ed. Louden, Robert B. and Zöller, Günter. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel. 2012 [1785]. Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, ed. Gregor, Mary and Timmerman, Jens. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel. 2015 [1788]. Critique of Practical Reason, ed. Gregor, Mary and Reath, Andrews. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel. 2017 [1797]. The Metaphysics of Morals, ed. Denis, Lara. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Laslett, Peter. 1956. ‘Introduction’ in Philosophy, Politics and Society, ed. Laslett, Peter, first series. New York.Google Scholar
Luban, Daniel. forthcoming. ‘Rawls on Envy’, working paper.Google Scholar
Mannheim, Karl. 1929. Ideologie und Utopie. Bonn.Google Scholar
Manuel, F. E and Manuel, F. P.. 1979. Utopian Thought in the Western World. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Miller, David. 1990. ‘The Resurgence of Political Theory’, Political Studies, 38: 3, pp. 421–37.Google Scholar
Millett, Kate. 1970. Sexual Politics. New York.Google Scholar
Moore, G. E. 1903. Principia Ethica. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Myrdal, Gunnar. 1944. An American Dilemma: The Negro Problem and Modern Democracy. New York.Google Scholar
Nagel, Thomas. 2003. ‘Rawls and Liberalism’ in The Cambridge Companion to Rawls, ed. Freeman, Samuel. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Nelson, Eric. 2019. The Theology of Liberalism: Political Philosophy and the Justice of God. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Nussbaum, Martha. 2001. ‘The Enduring Significance of John Rawls’, Chronicle of Higher Education, 47: 45, B7–B9.Google Scholar
O’Neill, Onora. 2002. ‘Constructivism in Rawls and Kant’ in The Cambridge Companion to Rawls, ed. Freeman, Samuel. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Park, Robert E. 1950. Race and Culture. Glencoe, IL.Google Scholar
Pasternack, Lawrence. 2011. ‘The Development and Scope of Kantian Belief: The Highest Good, the Practical Postulates and the Fact of Reason’, Kant-Studien, 102: 3, pp. 290–315.Google Scholar
Plamenatz, John. 1960. ‘The Use of Political Theory’, Political Studies, 8, pp. 37–47.Google Scholar
Plato, . 2000. The Republic, ed. Ferrari, G. R. F.. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Pogge, Thomas. 2007. John Rawls: His Life and Theory of Justice. Oxford.Google Scholar
Prichard, H. A. 1912. ‘Does Moral Philosophy Rest on a Mistake?’ Mind, 21, pp. 21–37.Google Scholar
Rawls, John. 1951. ‘Outline of a Decision Procedure for Ethics’ in John Rawls: Collected Papers.Google Scholar
Rawls, John. 1958. ‘Justice as Fairness’ in John Rawls: Collected Papers.Google Scholar
Rawls, John. 1963. ‘Constitutional Liberty and the Concept of Justice’ in John Rawls: Collected Papers.Google Scholar
Rawls, John. 1971a. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Rawls, John. 1971b. ‘Justice as Reciprocity’ in John Rawls: Collected Papers.Google Scholar
Rawls, John. 1971c [rev. 1999]. A Theory of Justice. Rev. ed. Oxford.Google Scholar
Rawls, John. 1975. ‘The Independence of Moral Theory’ in John Rawls: Collected Papers.Google Scholar
Rawls, John. 1980. ‘Kantian Constructivism in Moral Theory’ in John Rawls: Collected Papers.Google Scholar
Rawls, John. 1982. ‘Social Unity and Primary Goods’ in John Rawls: Collected Papers.Google Scholar
Rawls, John. 1985. ‘Justice as Fairness: Political not Metaphysical’ in John Rawls: Collected Papers.Google Scholar
Rawls, John. 1987. ‘The Idea of an Overlapping Consensus’ in John Rawls: Collected Papers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rawls, John. 1989. ‘The Domain of the Political and Overlapping Consensus’ in John Rawls: Collected Papers.Google Scholar
Rawls, John. 1993 [rev. 1996]. Political Liberalism. New York.Google Scholar
Rawls, John. 1999. Law of Peoples. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Rawls, John. 2000. Lectures on the History of Moral Philosophy, ed. Herman, Barbara. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Rawls, John. 2001a. John Rawls: Collected Papers, ed. Freeman, Samuel. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Rawls, John. 2001b. Justice as Fairness: A Restatement. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Rawls, John. 2007. Lectures on the History of Political Philosophy, ed. Freeman, Samuel. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Rawls, John. 2009 [1942]. A Brief Inquiry into the Meaning of Sin and Faith. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Rodgers, Daniel T. 2011. Age of Fracture. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Ross, Dorothy. 1991. The Origins of American Social Science. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Ross, W. D. 1930. The Right and the Good. Oxford.Google Scholar
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. 1964 [1762]. Du contrat social in Oeuvres complètes, vol. III, ed. Derathé, R. et al. Paris.Google Scholar
Runciman, W. G. 1969. Social Science and Political Theory. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Sagar, Paul. 2018. The Opinion of Mankind: Sociability and the Theory of the State from Hobbes to Smith. Princeton.Google Scholar
Scanlon, T. M. 1985. ‘Local Justice’, London Review of Books, September, 7: 15, pp. 17–18.Google Scholar
Schmitt, Carl. 1985 [1923, rev. 1926]. The Crisis of Parliamentary Democracy. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Schnädelbach, Herbert. 1984. Philosophy in Germany: 1831–1933. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Sellars, Wilfrid. 2007. ‘Philosophy and the Scientific Image of Man’ (1962) in In the Space of Reasons: Selected Essays, ed. Sharp, Kevin and Brandom, Robert B.. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Sellars, Wilfrid and Hospers, John. 1952. Readings in Ethical Theory. New York.Google Scholar
Shklar, Judith. 1965. ‘The Political Theory of Utopia: From Melancholy to Nostalgia’, Daedalus, 94: 2, pp. 367–81.Google Scholar
Sidgwick, Henry. 1899. ‘The Relation of Ethics to Sociology’, International Journal of Ethics, 10: 1, pp. 1–21.Google Scholar
Smith, Adam. 1976 [1776]. Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, ed. Campbell, R. H. and Skinner, A. S.. Oxford.Google Scholar
Spector, Céline. 2016. ‘Rousseau at Harvard’ in Engaging with Rousseau: Reaction and Interpretation from the Eighteenth Century to the Present, ed. Lifschitz, Avi. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Tamir, Yael. 1993. Liberal Nationalism. Princeton.Google Scholar
Thomas, William I. and Znaniecki, Florian. 1918–20. The Polish Peasant in Europe and America. 5 vols. Boston.Google Scholar
Toews, John. 1981. Hegelianism: The Path toward Dialectical Humanism. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Ture, Kwame [Carmichael, Stokely] and Hamilton, Charles V.. 1967. Black Power: The Politics of Liberation. New York.Google Scholar
Urmson, J. O. 1974–5. ‘A Defense of Intuitionism’, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, New Series, 75, pp. 111–19.Google Scholar
Valentini, Laura. 2012. ‘Ideal vs. Non‐Ideal Theory: A Conceptual Map’, Philosophy Compass, 7: 9, pp. 654–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Leeuwen, Hendrik Gerrit. 1961. ‘The Problem of Certainty in English Thought from Chillingworth to Locke’, PhD thesis, State University of Iowa.Google Scholar
von Neumann, John. 1947. ‘The Mathematician’ in The Works of the Mind, ed. Heywood, R. B.. Chicago.Google Scholar
Waldron, Jeremy. 1992. ‘Justice Revisited: Rawls Turns towards Political Philosophy’, Times Literary Supplement, 18 June, pp. 5–6.Google Scholar
Waldron, Jeremy. 2016. Political Political Theory: Essays on Institutions. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Walzer, Michael. 1983. Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pluralism and Equality. New York.Google Scholar
Weithman, Paul. 2010. Why Political Liberalism: On John Rawls’s Political Turn. Oxford.Google Scholar
Weithman, Paul. 2016. Rawls, Political Liberalism and Reasonable Faith. Cambridge.Google Scholar
White, Morton. 1956. Toward Reunion in Philosophy. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Williams, Bernard. 1995. Making Sense of Humanity and Other Philosophical Papers, 1982–1993. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Williams, Bernard. 2005. In the Beginning was the Deed: Realism and Moralism in Political Argument. Princeton.Google Scholar
Wood, Allen W. 1970. Kant’s Moral Religion. Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
Wood, Allen W. 2020. Kant and Religion. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wuthnow, Robert. 1988. The Restructuring of American Religion. Princeton.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×