John Rawls’ philosophy is widely regarded as one of the most influential frameworks in modern political thought. Central to his work is the concept of political liberalism, an idea that often remains partially understood by those seeking to refine their own philosophy of life. Developing a clear understanding of this concept is crucial, as it can profoundly shape the way we approach our personal and collective beliefs. This article examines John Rawls’ philosophy, the principle of political liberalism, and their importance in the broader context of shaping a philosophy of life.
Key features of John Rawls’ philosophy
John Rawls was a renowned philosopher best known for his work on justice and fairness in society. His ideas are primarily outlined in his book A Theory of Justice, where he developed the concept of “justice as fairness.” One of his key ideas is the “original position,” a hypothetical scenario where individuals agree on the principles of justice while behind a “veil of ignorance.” This veil prevents them from knowing their own social status, wealth, abilities, or personal preferences, ensuring decisions are made fairly and without bias.
Rawls proposed two main principles of justice. The first is the principle of equal basic liberties, which ensures that everyone has the same fundamental rights, such as freedom of speech and the right to vote. The second is the difference principle, which states that inequalities in wealth or social standing are acceptable only if they benefit the least advantaged members of society.
His philosophy emphasizes fairness and equality while recognizing that some inequality is inevitable. However, any such inequality must work to improve opportunities and conditions for those who are worse off. By focusing on fairness and impartiality, Rawls’ ideas have had a significant influence on political theory, law, and social justice movements.
What is political liberalism?
John Rawls’s view of political liberalism focuses on how societies can achieve stability and fairness while respecting the diversity of beliefs among their members. He argues that a well-ordered society should not be based on a single comprehensive doctrine, such as religious or philosophical beliefs, because citizens naturally hold different views about what constitutes a good life. Instead, Rawls proposes that a society should be organized around principles of justice that people with varying perspectives can agree upon.
These principles of justice are established through what Rawls calls an “overlapping consensus.” This means that individuals with differing worldviews might support shared principles for their own reasons, allowing them to coexist peacefully. Rawls also emphasizes the idea of public reason, which asks citizens to justify political decisions in terms that others, regardless of their personal beliefs, can reasonably accept. This ensures that political arguments are inclusive and accessible.
For Rawls, political liberalism provides a framework where individuals can live together despite deep differences by focusing on common ground rather than personal ideologies. It seeks to protect individual freedoms while ensuring fairness in societal structures, allowing for a stable and just political order in a pluralistic society.
This example helps to demonstrate this philosophical perspective. Imagine a society where political decisions are made under what John Rawls calls a “veil of ignorance.” Individuals tasked with setting the rules of this society do not know their own place within it—they are unaware of their race, gender, wealth, or social status. This ensures their choices are impartial and just, as they cannot favor themselves or any particular group. For instance, under this veil, people might endorse equal access to education or healthcare, knowing such policies would benefit everyone, regardless of where they end up in society. By designing fair principles in this way, decisions are made to protect the rights and freedoms of all citizens, particularly those who are most vulnerable. This approach highlights the importance of fairness and equality in maintaining a stable and inclusive society.
Challenges to John Rawls’s view about political liberalism
Philosophers who object to or reject John Rawls’s view about political liberalism often raise concerns about its assumptions, scope, and practical implications. One major criticism is that Rawls’s framework relies heavily on the idea of a shared reasonable consensus, which some argue is overly idealistic. Critics point out that societies are deeply diverse, containing people with conflicting values and belief systems that cannot always be reconciled under a single framework of reasonableness. This leads to the argument that Rawls’s model of political liberalism may fail to account for real-world disagreements and pluralism.
Another objection comes from the idea that Rawls’s approach may dismiss or marginalize certain voices and perspectives. For example, some philosophers argue that Rawls’s principles inherently favour Western liberal traditions and fail to adequately respect or incorporate non-liberal perspectives, such as those arising from certain religious or cultural groups. This creates a concern that political liberalism might unintentionally enforce conformity to a specific worldview, rather than promoting true inclusivity.
Additionally, critics have argued that Rawls’s theory is too abstract and removed from practical application. While his formulation of justice might work in theory, some suggest it does not provide sufficient guidance for addressing concrete political issues or conflicts. Critics worry that policymakers may struggle to apply the principles of political liberalism in real-world scenarios with complex and competing interests at play.
Some philosophers also object to Rawls’s heavy reliance on rationality as the basis for his framework. They argue that human behaviour and political life are influenced by emotions, traditions, and historical contexts, which Rawls arguably overlooks. This critique suggests that by focusing primarily on rational deliberation, Rawls may neglect aspects of human nature that are essential for understanding and resolving political conflicts.
Ultimately, objections to Rawls’s view about political liberalism stem from concerns about its feasibility, inclusivity, and applicability in diverse and complex societies. Philosophers who challenge his ideas often call for frameworks that better address these shortcomings while still aiming for fairness and justice.
Why political liberalism is important to John Rawls’ philosophy
Understanding the concept of political liberalism is essential to comprehending John Rawls’ philosophy for several key reasons.
- Focus on Justice as Fairness
Political liberalism emphasizes the importance of justice as fairness in structuring society. It recognizes that people in a democratic society have diverse beliefs, cultural backgrounds, and value systems. This diversity makes it essential to create a fair system that all individuals, regardless of their personal views, can accept. Political liberalism ensures that fairness becomes the guiding principle for organizing social institutions, giving everyone an equal chance to succeed and thrive in society. By focusing on fairness, it provides a framework that respects differences while promoting equality.
- Respect for Pluralism
One key reason political liberalism is important is its commitment to respecting pluralism. Pluralism refers to the existence of multiple, often conflicting, moral, religious, and philosophical perspectives within a society. Political liberalism seeks to establish a system where such differences are not only tolerated but valued. By creating a neutral political framework, it allows individuals from different backgrounds to live together peacefully. This idea acknowledges that no single worldview should dominate, which helps to maintain harmony in diverse societies.
- Separation of Public and Private Spheres
Political liberalism highlights the need to separate the public and private spheres of life. It acknowledges that individuals must have the freedom to pursue their own personal beliefs, values, and goals in their private lives without interference. At the same time, it focuses on establishing a public framework where shared principles guide collective decisions. This balance is crucial for protecting individual freedoms while maintaining social order, ensuring that personal beliefs do not disrupt the fair functioning of society.
- Basis for Political Stability
Another significant aspect of political liberalism is its contribution to political stability in democratic societies. By providing a system where citizens with varying beliefs can coexist, it reduces the risk of conflict over fundamental differences. Political liberalism encourages the creation of laws and policies that are justifiable to all, regardless of their diverse perspectives. This approach fosters a sense of trust and cooperation among citizens, which is essential for maintaining a stable and peaceful political environment over time.
Contrasting John Rawls’ philosophy with Carl Schmitt’s philosophy
John Rawls’s view on political liberalism stands in stark contrast to Carl Schmitt’s approach to political philosophy. Rawls emphasized the importance of fairness, mutual respect, and the principles of justice within a diverse society. He believed in creating a political framework that could accommodate individuals with differing moral and religious views while ensuring equality and cooperation. This focus on inclusivity and consensus highlights Rawls’s optimistic view of how society can function through shared principles and dialogue.
On the other hand, Carl Schmitt took a more conflict-oriented perspective. Schmitt argued that politics is fundamentally about the distinction between “friend” and “enemy.” For Schmitt, political order arises from power and the ability to determine acceptable boundaries, often through exclusion. This outlook reflects a skeptical view of pluralism, as Schmitt believed that deep ideological or cultural divisions make it hard, if not impossible, to achieve true consensus among people.
The key difference lies in how each thinker approaches diversity and disagreement. Rawls seeks to build a system where lasting harmony is possible even among conflicting values. Schmitt, however, portrays politics as inherently adversarial and rooted in decisions about who belongs and who doesn’t. This critical divergence illustrates how Rawls’s philosophy focuses on cooperation while Schmitt’s is grounded in conflict.
Political Liberalism, John Rawls’ philosophy and the meaning of life
Reflecting on John Rawls’s philosophy and his ideas about political liberalism is a valuable exercise, regardless of whether you agree with his views or not. This reflection encourages a deeper engagement with the principles that shape fairness, justice, and equality in our daily lives. While Rawls’s philosophy pertains to the broader workings of society, considering his ideas on justice can prompt personal introspection into how we treat others, how we make decisions, and how we strive for fairness in our interactions.
By thinking critically about Rawls’s work, we challenge ourselves to evaluate the principles that guide not only political systems but also our individual choices. It invites us to question whether we are contributing to a fair and equitable environment in our own spheres of influence—whether that’s in the workplace, within our families, or in our broader communities. This process is crucial for personal growth, as it pushes us to align our actions with values that promote inclusivity and respect for others.
Additionally, Rawls’s concepts, like fairness and justice, can act as a moral compass when confronting ethical dilemmas. Reflecting on these ideas may inspire us to act more selflessly and to consider the impact of our choices on others, especially those who may be disadvantaged. This practice not only fosters empathy but also allows us to develop a sense of purpose, as we become more invested in contributing to the well-being of others.
Ultimately, engaging with Rawls’s philosophy encourages a mindset centred on reflection and intentionality. By weaving these ideas into our daily lives, we cultivate habits of thoughtfulness and fairness that are crucial to living meaningfully. Regardless of agreement or disagreement with his specific views, the act of grappling with these ideas can be profoundly enriching, helping us to lead lives that are not only more just but also more connected to the broader humanity we share.
Further reading
Cohen, G. A. (2008). Rescuing Justice and Equality. Harvard University Press.
Freeman, S. (2007). Rawls. Routledge.
Gališanka, A. (2019). John Rawls: The Path to a Theory of Justice. Harvard University Press.
Habermas, J. (1995). “Reconciliation through the Public Use of Reason: Remarks on John Rawls’s Political Liberalism.” Journal of Philosophy, 92(3), 109-131. https://doi.org/10.2307/2940842
Moon, J. D. (1993). “The Liberalism of Political Liberalism.” Philosophy & Public Affairs, 21(2), 134-159. https://doi.org/10.2307/2265188
Nagel, T. (1991). Equality and Partiality. Oxford University Press.
Peterson, S. (2008). “Political Liberalism and the Rationality of Agreement.” Journal of Political Philosophy, 16(3), 259-281. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9760.2008.00252.x
Quong, J. (2011). Liberalism Without Perfection. Oxford University Press.
Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Harvard University Press.
Rawls, J. (1993). Political Liberalism. Columbia University Press.
Rawls, J. (2001). Justice as Fairness: A Restatement. Harvard University Press.
Weithman, P. (2010). Why Political Liberalism? On John Rawls’s Political Turn. Oxford University Press.