IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/polstu/v46y1998i2p276-294.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

‘Inevitable and Unacceptable?’ Methodological Rawlsianism in Anglo‐American Political Philosophy

Author

Listed:
  • Wayne Norman

Abstract

This article attempts two parallel tasks. First, it gives a sympathetic explication of the implicit working methodology (‘Methodological Rawlsianism’) of mainstream contemporary political theory in the English‐speaking world. And second, principally in footnotes, it surveys the recent literature on justification to see what light these debates cast on the tenets of this methodology. It is worth examining methodological presuppositions because these can have a profound influence on substantive theories: many of the differences between philosophical traditions can be traced to their methodologies. My aim is to expose the central features of methodological Rawlsianism in order to challenge critics of this tradition to explain exactly where and why they depart from the method. While I do not defend it at length, I do suggest that methodological Rawlsianism is inevitable insofar as it is basically a form of common sense. This fact should probably lower expectations about the amount of progress consistent methodological Rawlsians are likely to make in grounding comprehensive normative political theories.

Suggested Citation

  • Wayne Norman, 1998. "‘Inevitable and Unacceptable?’ Methodological Rawlsianism in Anglo‐American Political Philosophy," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 46(2), pages 276-294, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:polstu:v:46:y:1998:i:2:p:276-294
    DOI: 10.1111/1467-9248.00140
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9248.00140
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1467-9248.00140?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Neelke Doorn, 2010. "Applying Rawlsian Approaches to Resolve Ethical Issues: Inventory and Setting of a Research Agenda," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 91(1), pages 127-143, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:polstu:v:46:y:1998:i:2:p:276-294. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0032-3217 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.