Reasonable Values and the Value of Reasonableness. Reflections on John Rawls’ Political Liberalism

This paper aims to question the idea of reasonableness in Rawls’ account of political liberalism. My point is that reasonableness as the moral basis of the liberal society provides restrictions for differences – be they philosophical, moral, religious, cultural – to be included in the liberal socie...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Roberta Sala
Formato: article
Lenguaje:EN
FR
IT
Publicado: Rosenberg & Sellier 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://doaj.org/article/5c74a8d38f5d4b29b5fcf1df69a55435
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
id oai:doaj.org-article:5c74a8d38f5d4b29b5fcf1df69a55435
record_format dspace
spelling oai:doaj.org-article:5c74a8d38f5d4b29b5fcf1df69a554352021-12-02T10:11:07ZReasonable Values and the Value of Reasonableness. Reflections on John Rawls’ Political Liberalism10.13128/Phe_Mi-196172280-78532239-4028https://doaj.org/article/5c74a8d38f5d4b29b5fcf1df69a554352016-11-01T00:00:00Zhttps://oaj.fupress.net/index.php/pam/article/view/7099https://doaj.org/toc/2280-7853https://doaj.org/toc/2239-4028 This paper aims to question the idea of reasonableness in Rawls’ account of political liberalism. My point is that reasonableness as the moral basis of the liberal society provides restrictions for differences – be they philosophical, moral, religious, cultural – to be included in the liberal society. Notwithstanding Rawls’ attempt to expand political boundaries and to include those people who do not share moral liberal justification to justice as fairness, reasonableness selects “values holders” and assigns to the so-called “reasonable” a place in the political debate. The others, the “unreasonable”, are expected to become reasonable; alternatively, they would be paid control or even coercion in all the circumstances in which they should represent a risk for political stability. I believe that Rawls gives an incomplete account of unreasonableness: there may well be persons who are not “reasonable” in Rawlsian terms but who do not necessarily represent a danger for the just society. By the fact that they do not endorse values as freedom and equality in which fair cooperation is grounded, we cannot infer that they will necessarily try to violate the terms around which cooperation is structured by imposing their values on others. I proceed as follows: a) I detail the Rawlsian political turn in defending justice as fairness; b) I focus on the idea of reasonableness as the core of political liberalism; c) I defend the thesis that political liberalism needs to revise the idea of unreasonableness if it aims to deal with pluralism as a social and political fact. Roberta SalaRosenberg & Sellierarticlelegitimacytolerationpolitical justificationagreementAestheticsBH1-301EthicsBJ1-1725ENFRITPhenomenology and Mind, Iss 3 (2016)
institution DOAJ
collection DOAJ
language EN
FR
IT
topic legitimacy
toleration
political justification
agreement
Aesthetics
BH1-301
Ethics
BJ1-1725
spellingShingle legitimacy
toleration
political justification
agreement
Aesthetics
BH1-301
Ethics
BJ1-1725
Roberta Sala
Reasonable Values and the Value of Reasonableness. Reflections on John Rawls’ Political Liberalism
description This paper aims to question the idea of reasonableness in Rawls’ account of political liberalism. My point is that reasonableness as the moral basis of the liberal society provides restrictions for differences – be they philosophical, moral, religious, cultural – to be included in the liberal society. Notwithstanding Rawls’ attempt to expand political boundaries and to include those people who do not share moral liberal justification to justice as fairness, reasonableness selects “values holders” and assigns to the so-called “reasonable” a place in the political debate. The others, the “unreasonable”, are expected to become reasonable; alternatively, they would be paid control or even coercion in all the circumstances in which they should represent a risk for political stability. I believe that Rawls gives an incomplete account of unreasonableness: there may well be persons who are not “reasonable” in Rawlsian terms but who do not necessarily represent a danger for the just society. By the fact that they do not endorse values as freedom and equality in which fair cooperation is grounded, we cannot infer that they will necessarily try to violate the terms around which cooperation is structured by imposing their values on others. I proceed as follows: a) I detail the Rawlsian political turn in defending justice as fairness; b) I focus on the idea of reasonableness as the core of political liberalism; c) I defend the thesis that political liberalism needs to revise the idea of unreasonableness if it aims to deal with pluralism as a social and political fact.
format article
author Roberta Sala
author_facet Roberta Sala
author_sort Roberta Sala
title Reasonable Values and the Value of Reasonableness. Reflections on John Rawls’ Political Liberalism
title_short Reasonable Values and the Value of Reasonableness. Reflections on John Rawls’ Political Liberalism
title_full Reasonable Values and the Value of Reasonableness. Reflections on John Rawls’ Political Liberalism
title_fullStr Reasonable Values and the Value of Reasonableness. Reflections on John Rawls’ Political Liberalism
title_full_unstemmed Reasonable Values and the Value of Reasonableness. Reflections on John Rawls’ Political Liberalism
title_sort reasonable values and the value of reasonableness. reflections on john rawls’ political liberalism
publisher Rosenberg & Sellier
publishDate 2016
url https://doaj.org/article/5c74a8d38f5d4b29b5fcf1df69a55435
work_keys_str_mv AT robertasala reasonablevaluesandthevalueofreasonablenessreflectionsonjohnrawlspoliticalliberalism
_version_ 1718397581691715584