Search
Search
Rawls on the Limits—and Limited Exposure—of Philosophy
Rawls on the Limits—and Limited Exposure—of Philosophy

Date

source

share

In an interview in 1991, John Rawls is asked, “When you look at current events, in general, do you think of them with the A Theory of Justice framework in mind?”

John Rawls, in the shadows. Photo from Harvard Review of Philosophy.

He replies:

Not really. Well, like anyone else, I react to current events and present problems in a certain way. I’m sure that my view must affect in some manner how I see them, but I don’t just ask what justice as fairness would say. That
would be limiting.

I don’t see a political conception of justice as something that will tell me what to think. It’s a great mistake to think of it as a device that will give you asnwers, that will deliver the answers to all sorts of questions when you want them. That is one reason I am reluctant to answer questions about specific political topics. It suggests the wrong idea: that we could [have] some theoretical way of doing that, which is usually not so at all. I think of justice as fairness as trying to answer certain specific though basic questions. Its scope is limited.

In any case, a reasonable view is important but it doesn’t begin to be enough by itself. Judgment, informed opinion, due consideration, and much, much else are required. Usually if a question interests me, I may form an opinion on its merits. That’s probably the best thing to do — and then see whether the opinion is reasonable, and what other people think. Except for special cases, I wouldn’t ask whether the opinion fits with A Theory of Justice.

Besides, it would be a mistake to apply one’s principles all the time. You need to examine things apart from them, else you risk becoming an ideologue. People who have opinions on everything derived from their so-called principles are not to be trusted.

Later in the interview, in response to a question about advice to a student interested in philosophy, he says:

The real rewards of philosophy are personal and private and you should understand that. I think philosophy is a very special subject, particularly in our society, which pays very little attention to most serious philosophy, even when it is very well done. However, this is not a complaint, and it may be a good thing.

The interview was conducted by Samuel R. Aybar, Joshua D. Harlan, and Won J. Lee for the Harvard Review of Philosophy. You can read the whole interview here.

Originally appeared on Daily Nous Read More

More
articles

More
news

What is Disagreement?

What is Disagreement?

This is Part 1 of a 4-part series on the academic, and specifically philosophical study of disagreement. In this series...

APA Member Interview: Rami El Ali

APA Member Interview: Rami El Ali

Bio: Rami El Ali works on the philosophy of perception, technology, and phenomenology. He is currently pursuing a second PhD...

Episteme and Techne

Episteme and Techne

[Revised entry by Richard Parry on December 19, 2024. Changes to: Main text, Bibliography] Episteme is the Greek word most...

Alexander Crummell

Alexander Crummell

[Revised entry by Stephen Thompson on December 19, 2024. Changes to: Main text, Bibliography] Alexander Crummell (1819 – 1898) was...

Medieval Philosophy

Medieval Philosophy

[Revised entry by John Marenbon on December 19, 2024. Changes to: Main text, Bibliography, notes.html] “Medieval philosophy” has changed its...