Unity with(in) plurality: Rawls's idea of public justification reinterpreted

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Yazıcı, Sedat
dc.date.accessioned 2019-06-26T07:09:50Z
dc.date.available 2019-06-26T07:09:50Z
dc.date.issued 2004
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/11772/1515
dc.description.abstract This paper explores and interprets Rawls's idea of public justification by analysing the types of reasons that citizens use when engaged in public justification of a political conception of justice. In particular, I focus on the distinction between “consensual” and “distributive” modes of justification. Some critics have argued that Rawls is unclear whether he is relying on “consensual” or “distributive” forms of reasoning; others argue that Rawls shifts in -consistently between them. I attempt to clarify this puzzle. I show that consensual and distributive modes of public reasoning are not mutually exclusive to each other. On the contrary, they are introduced as necessary com ponents of public justification in Rawls's theory. Thus, his model is consensual-cum-distributive. I also suggest some reasons why this model can better account for the liberal idea of pluralism, and how it offers a more realistic moral and political psychology, giving the account greater epistemic virtue than its alternatives. en_US
dc.language.iso eng en_US
dc.rights info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess en_US
dc.subject Felsefe en_US
dc.subject Siyaset felsefesi en_US
dc.title Unity with(in) plurality: Rawls's idea of public justification reinterpreted en_US
dc.type article en_US
dc.relation.journal South African Journal of Philosophy en_US
dc.identifier.volume 23 en_US
dc.identifier.issue 2 en_US
dc.identifier.startpage 120 en_US
dc.identifier.endpage 133 en_US

Files in this item

Files Size Format View

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search DSpace

Advanced Search


My Account