Abstract

This article engages with the discussion between Rawls and Habermas concerning the interplay of political realism and normativity to address a fundamental question in contemporary political philosophy. How realistic is a normative theory of politics that critiques or rejects many deep religious, philosophical, and metaphysical commitments? Rawls contends that political theory achieves realism and objectivity by avoiding pronouncements on metaphysical theories (non-metaphysical). In contrast, Habermas argues that realism emerges when grappling with metaphysical theories and prioritizing praxis over metaphysics (post-metaphysical). The article critically examines Rawls’s objections to metaphysical content, lack of practical interest, and the instability of the foundations of Habermas’s democratic theory. By addressing these objections, it advocates for the greater political realism of the post-metaphysical normative approach.