Three roles of ideal theory
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21814/eps.5.2.208Keywords:
Fairness, ideal theory, justice, non-ideal theory, RawlsAbstract
Rawlsian ideal theory is meant to perform various roles in non-ideal theory. In this paper, I distinguish between three roles, and I consider the extent to which we can expect ideal theory to perform them. It is meant to serve as a target to guide non-ideal theorising in the long-term. It is also supposed to provide a way of comparing different injustices to tell us which is worst and therefore in most urgent need of a remedy. Finally, ideal theory is the basis for a model of fairness that restricts the set of morally permissible measures in non-ideal theory. I show how the first two roles—the target and urgency roles—are less plausible than the fairness role.
References
Ashford, E. (2000). Utilitarianism, integrity, and partiality. Journal of Philosophy, 97(8), 421–439. https://doi.org/10.2307/2678423 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/jphil200097834
Brennan, G., & Pettit, P. (2005). The feasibility issue. In F. Jackson & M. Smith (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Contemporary Philosophy (pp. 258–279). Oxford University Press.
Farrelly, C. (2007). Justice in ideal theory: A refutation. Political Studies, 55(4), 844–864. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2007.00656.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2007.00656.x
Galston, W. A. (2010). Realism in political theory. European Journal of Political Theory, 9(4), 385–411. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474885110374001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1474885110374001
Gaus, G. (2016). The tyranny of the ideal: Justice in a diverse society. Princeton University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400881048
Goodin, R.E. (1995). Political ideals and political practice. British Journal of Political Science, 25(1), 37–56. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123400007055 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123400007055
Hart, H.L.A. (1973). Rawls on liberty and its priority. University of Chicago Law Review, 40(3), 534–555. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1599247
Kant, I. (1998). Groundwork on the metaphysics of morals (M. Gregor, Ed.). Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511809590
Korsgaard, C.M. (1996). Creating the kingdom of ends. Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139174503
Levy, J. T. (2016). There is no such thing as ideal theory. Social Philosophy and Policy, 33(1–2), 312–333. https://doi.org/10.1017/S026505251600025X DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S026505251600025X
Moen, L. J. K. (2022a). Making sense of full compliance. Social Theory and Practice, 48(2), 285–308. https://doi.org/10.5840/soctheorpract202231156 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/soctheorpract202231156
Moen, L. J. K. (2022b). Ideal theory and its fairness role. Journal of Value Inquiry. Published online. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10790-022-09905-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10790-022-09905-6
Pettit, P. (2017). Political realism meets civic republicanism. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 20(3), 331–347. https://doi.org/10.1080/13698230.2017.1293912 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13698230.2017.1293912
Rawls, J. (1999a). A theory of justice (Revised ed.). Belknap Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674042582
Rawls, J. (1999b). The law of Peoples. Harvard University Press.
Rawls, J. (2001). Justice as fairness: A restatement (E. Kelly, Ed.). Belknap Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv31xf5v0
Rawls, J. (2005). Political liberalism (Expanded ed.). Columbia University Press.
Rosenberg, A. (2016). On the very idea of ideal theory in political philosophy. Social Philosophy and Policy, 33(1–2), 55–75. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265052516000376 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265052516000376
Schmidtz, D. (2011). Nonideal theory: What it is and what it needs to be. Ethics, 121(4), 772–796. https://doi.org/10.1086/660816 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/660816
Sen, A. (2006). What do we want from a theory of justice? Journal of Philosophy, 103(5), 215–238. https://doi.org/10.5840/jphil2006103517 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/jphil2006103517
Sen, A. (2009). The idea of justice. Belknap Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674054578
Simmons, A. J. (2010). Ideal and nonideal theory. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 38(1), 5–36. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1088-4963.2009.01172.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1088-4963.2009.01172.x
Stemplowska, Z., & Swift, A. (2012). Ideal and nonideal theory. In D. Estlund (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Political Philosophy (pp. 373–389). Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195376692.013.0020
Taylor, R. S. (2009). Rawlsian affirmative action. Ethics, 119(3), 476–506. https://doi.org/10.1086/598170 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/598170
Valentini, L. (2009). On the apparent paradox of ideal theory. Journal of Political Philosophy, 17(3), 332–355. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9760.2008.00317.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9760.2008.00317.x
Waldron, J. (1993). Special ties and natural duties. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 22(1), 3–30.
Wiens, D. (2012). Prescribing institutions without ideal theory. Journal of Political Philosophy, 20(1), 45–70. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9760.2010.00387.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9760.2010.00387.x
Wiens, D. (2015). Against ideal guidance. Journal of Politics, 77(2), 433–446. https://doi.org/10.1086/679495 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/679495
