Can Classical Utilitarianism Participate in Overlapping Consensus?‐Why Not? (A Reply to Samuel Scheffler)

Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 50:93-100 (2008)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The main objective of Rawls’ Political Liberalism was to explain how a workable theory of justice can be established and sustained within a society that is marked by reasonable pluralism. In order to meet this end, Rawls introduces the following three concepts: political conception of justice, public reason, andoverlapping consensus. By relying on these three concepts, Rawls presents his two principles of justice as a two stage process. In the first stage, the two principles of justice are presented as a freestanding political conception justified solely by public reason. In the second stage, individuals engage in overlapping consensus which enables them to find additional supporting reasons for the political conception of justice from their own comprehensive doctrine. According to Rawls, even classical utilitarianism can support his two principles of justice by participating in overlapping consensus. However, Samuel Scheffler thinks that this is impossible. Scheffler’s argument relies on the fact that classical utilitarianism is decisively rejected by the initial contracting parties of the original position. Iargue that Scheffler misconceives the main purpose of the original position and that his argument doesn’t show that it is impossible for classical utilitarianism to participate in overlapping consensus.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,154

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Overlapping Consensus.Rex Martin - 2013 - In Jon Mandle & David A. Reidy (eds.), A Companion to Rawls. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 281–296.
Is a Political Conception of “Overlapping Consensus” an Adequate Basis for Global Justice?Karl-Otto Apel - 2001 - The Proceedings of the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy 11:1-15.
Rawlsian Political Liberalism, Public Reason, and Bioethics.Hon-Lam Li - 2021 - In Hon-Lam Li & Michael Campbell (eds.), Public Reason and Bioethics: Three Perspectives. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 3-57.
The Proceedings of the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy.David M. Rasmussen - 2001 - The Proceedings of the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy 11:xiii-xxi.
Overlapping Consensus.Remi Odedoyin - 2000 - Journal of Philosophical Research 25:323-343.
Overlapping Consensus.Remi Odedoyin - 2000 - Journal of Philosophical Research 25:323-343.
Can my religion influence my conception of justice? Political liberalism and the role of comprehensive doctrines.Paul Billingham - 2017 - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 20 (4):402-424.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-04-04

Downloads
87 (#238,424)

6 months
16 (#178,915)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Hun Chung
Waseda University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references