A Philosopher of Science Looks at Idealization in Political Theory

Datos Bibliográficos

ID23175498
AutoresJenann Ismael (0000-0002-3854-2898, University of Arizona, autor de correspondencia)
Año2016
Volumen33
Número1-2
Páginas11-31
Fecha de publicación2016-01-01
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaSocial Philosophy and Policy (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0265-0525 • E-ISSN: 1471-6437
EditorialCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/s026505251600039x
OpenAlexW2559869482
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas12
Referencias citadas7

Rawls ignited a debate in political theory when he introduced a division between the ideal and nonideal parts of a theory of justice. In the ideal part of the theory, one presents a positive conception of justice in a setting that assumes perfect compliance with the rules of justice. In the nonideal part, one addresses the question of what happens under departures from compliance. Critics of Rawls have attacked his focus on ideal theory as a form of utopianism, and have argued that political theory should be focused instead on providing solutions to the manifest injustices of the real world. In this essay, I offer a defense of the ideal/nonideal theory distinction according to which it amounts to nothing more than a division of labor, and explore some scientific analogies. Rawls’s own focus on the ideal part of the theory, I argue, stems from a felt need to clarify the foundations of justice, rather than a utopian neglect of real world problems.

Economic Justice · Epistemology · Focus (optics) · Ideal (ethics) · Ideal theory · Idealization · Law and economics · Nothing · Political philosophy · Political science · Politics · Scientific theory · Sociology · Critical Theory and Philosophy · Law · Mathematics · Philosophical Ethics and Theory · Philosophy · Political Philosophy and Ethics

Herramientas

Abrir DOISci-Hub