Abstract
This chapter compares the philosophical methods used respectively by John Rawls and Iris Marion Young. Rawls's theory is ideal in several interrelated methodological respects: he emphasizes principle over practice; he relies on a fictional reasoning process; and his theory is designed for an imagined world that lacks many problematic aspects of the real world. Young's method, which she characterizes as critical theory, is non-ideal in all the respects that Rawls's method is ideal. Young emphasizes practice; she respects the reasoning of actual people; and she directly addresses existing injustices. If Young has been able to develop philosophical ideals of justice that are more comprehensive, relevant, and substantively acceptable than Rawls's, I suggest that one reason may be the non-ideal aspects of her methodology. In the end, however, Young's philosophical contributions cannot be attributed only to her method; they are also the product of her unique political passion and creative imagination.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Title of host publication | Feminist Ethics and Social and Political Philosophy: Theorizing the Non-Ideal |
Publisher | Springer |
Pages | 59-66 |
Number of pages | 8 |
ISBN (Print) | 9781402068409 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 2009 |
Keywords
- Critical theory
- Iris Marion Young
- Non-ideal theory
- Philosophical method
- Rawls
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Social Sciences(all)
- Arts and Humanities(all)