Rawls, Ideal Theory and the Relevance of Context
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47456/sofia.v14i2.51017Keywords:
ideal theory, non-ideal theory, context, justiceAbstract
The article investigates how John Rawls’s theory of justice both accommodates and limits the relevance of context within his account of justice as fairness, drawing on the distinction between ideal and non-ideal theory. First, we reconstruct the ideal dimension of the Rawlsian framework, with emphasis on the circumstances of justice, the moral psychology of agents, and the notion of the quasi-stability of a well-ordered society. We then offer an account of these non-ideal circumstances as a kind of challenging context that serves as a test for the scope of ideal theories of justice. Engaging with the debate on contextualism in justice, and in particular with so-called iterative contextualism, the article defends a more open reading of Rawls’s theory, one that can enter into dialogue with this kind of approach without abandoning the normative core of his proposal as presented in the ideal part of his theory.
References
ARAUJO, Ricardo C. de; MAURICIO JÚNIOR, Alceu. O perfeccionismo político como possível concretização do fato da maioria: Uma alternativa em direção às sociedades bem-ordenadas. Novos Estudos - CEBRAP, v. 41, n. 3, dez de 2022, p. 527–43. Doi 10.25091/S01013300202200030005.
BARBOSA, Evandro. The COVID-19 Pandemic as a Severe Scarcity Condition: Testing the Tenacity of Ideal Theories of Justice.” In: Gottfried Schweiger (Org.). The Global and Social Consequences of the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Ethical and Philosophical Reflection. 1ed. Cham: Springer, 2022, v. 1, p. 19-34. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-97982-9_2.
BARBOSA, Evandro; ALVES COSTA, Thaís Alves Costa. Faces of Responsibility and Moral Agency in a Pandemic Age. Moral Challenges in a Pandemic Age, por Evandro Barbosa, 1º ed., Routledge, 2023, p. 239–60. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003310129-18.
BUCKLEY, Michael. Justice in Context: Assessing Contextualism as an Approach to Justice. Ethics & Global Politics, v. 5, n. 2, jan. de 2012, p. 71 -94. https://doi.org/10.3402/egp.v5i2.8970.
CARENS, Joseph. Culture, citizenship, and community. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.
CARENS, Joseph. A contextual approach to political theory. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 7, 2004, p. 117–132.
HUME, David. An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals, ed. Tom L. Beauchamp. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998.
HUME, David. A Treatise of Human Nature, ed. David Fate Norton and Mary J. Norton. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.
LÆGAARD, Sune. Multiculturalism and contextualism: How is context relevant for political theory? European Journal of Political Theory. 14, 2015, p. 259–276.
MILLER, David. Two Ways to Think About Justice. Politics, Philosophy & Economics 1, no. 5, 2002, p. 5-28.
MODOOD, Tariq; THOMPSON, Simon. Revisiting Contextualism in Political Theory: Putting Principles into Context. Res Publica, v. 24, n. 3, ago. de 2018, p. 339-357. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11158-017-9358-1.
RAWLS, J. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1971.
RAWLS, J. Uma teoria da justiça. Tradução Almino Pisetta; Lenita M. R. Esteves. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 2000.
VALENTINI, Laura. Ideal vs. Non‐ideal Theory: A Conceptual Map. Philosophy Compass, v. 7, n. 9, set. de 2012, p. 654-664. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-9991.2012.00500.x.
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Evandro Barbosa, Thaís Alves Costa
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Given the journal's open access policy, the use of published texts is free of charge, with the obligation to acknowledge the original authorship and first publication in this journal. The authors of the published contributions are entirely and exclusively responsible for their content.
I. The authors authorize the publication of the article in this journal.
II. The authors guarantee that the contribution is original and assume full responsibility for its content in the event of third-party claims.
III. The authors guarantee that the contribution is not under evaluation by another journal.
IV. The authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication, with the work licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License.
V. The authors are authorized and encouraged to disseminate and distribute their work online after publication in the journal.
VI. The authors of approved works authorize the journal to distribute their content, after publication, for reproduction in content indexes, virtual libraries, and similar platforms.
VII. The editors reserve the right to make adjustments to the text and adapt the article to the journal's editorial standards.
