A liberal society seeks not to impose a single way of life, but to leave its citizens as free as possible to choose their own values and ends. It therefore must govern by principles of justice that do not presuppose any particular vision of the good life. But can any such principles be found? And if not, what are the consequences for justice as a moral and political ideal? These are the questions Michael Sandel takes up in this penetrating critique (...) of contemporary liberalism. Sandel locates modern liberalism in the tradition of Kant, and focuses on its most influential recent expression in the work of John Rawls. In the most important challenge yet to Rawls' theory of justice, Sandel traces the limits of liberalism to the conception of the person that underlies it, and argues for a deeper understanding of community than liberalism allows. (shrink)

Required reading at more than 100 colleges and universities throughout North America.

Remarks on political philosophy -- Lectures on Hobbes -- Lectures on Locke -- Lectures on Hume -- Lectures on Rousseau -- Lectures on Mill -- Lectures on Marx.

A liberal society seeks not to impose a single way of life, but to leave its citizens as free as possible to choose their own values and ends. It therefore must govern by principles of justice that do not presuppose any particular vision of the good life. But can any such principles be found? And if not, what are the consequences for justice as a moral and political ideal? These are the questions Michael Sandel takes up in this penetrating critique (...) of contemporary liberalism. Sandel locates modern liberalism in the tradition of Kant, and focuses on its most influential recent expression in the work of John Rawls. In the most important challenge yet to Rawls' theory of justice, Sandel traces the limits of liberalism to the conception of the person that underlies it, and argues for a deeper understanding of community than liberalism allows. (shrink)

In this book, one of the world's preeminent philosophers takes issue with an idea that has found an all-too-prominent place in popular culture and philosophical ...

This book brings together the lectures that inspired a generation of students--and a regeneration of moral philosophy.

Consisting of two essays, this work by a Harvard professor offers his thoughts on the idea of a social contract regulating people's behavior toward one another.

The central aim of Hegel's' social philosophy (the Rechtsphilosophie) is to reconcile his contemporaries--the men and women of the nineteenth century--to the modern social world. By "the modem social world" I mean the central social institutions of that era: the family, civil society, and the state. Hegel seeks to enable his contemporaries to overcome their alienation from this world by providing them with a philosophical theory that will reveal its true nature (PR, Preface sec. 14). "The project of reconciliation" is (...) the name I have given to this enterprise. My aim in this article is to introduce Hegel's project. I shall neither attempt to present the project nor attempt to assess it. My aim is simply to explain what the project is. I begin by considering the problem the project addresses and the sort of solution it proposes, and devote the remainder of the article to an examination of the project's goal. (shrink)

Bertrand Russell described this study, with its companion volume on Plato, as a work of first-class importance. Karl Popper writes with extreme clarity and vigour. Platonic history will never be the same again.

This is the most important book on Hegel to have appeared in the past ten years. The author offers a completely new interpretation of Hegel's idealism that focuses on Hegel's appropriation and development of Kant's theoretical project. Hegel is presented neither as a pre-critical metaphysician nor as a social theorist, but as a critical philosopher whose disagreements with Kant, especially on the issue of intuitions, enrich the idealist arguments against empiricism, realism, and naturalism. In the face of the dismissal of (...) absolute idealism as either unintelligible or implausible, Pippin explains and defends an original account of the philosophical basis for Hegel's claims about the historical and social nature of self-consciousness and of knowledge itself. (shrink)

There is a didactical as well as a philosophical importance to providing a commentary on the Preface to Hegel's handbook on the philosophy of right. Considering the fact that the text brings us the thought of a great and difficult philosopher in a non-rigorous, "exoteric" way, it is well suited to the task of introducing students to the world of think ing. It is, however, too difficult to do this without being supplemented by some explanation. Analysis and hints for further (...) study are necessi tated here by both the interweaving of political and philosophical viewpoints and the philosophical presuppositions with which this Preface is full. The philosophical importance of a commentary on Hegel's text can be found partially in the incessant quotation of the Preface in the literature on Hegel's philosophy to justify very different and contra dictory interpretations. As long as the specialists do not agree about the meaning of the Preface to the Philosophy of Right, anyone trying to explain it cannot avoid the task of making his or her own contribu tion to the philosophical debate concerning the nature and content of Hegel's work. (shrink)

A critical evaluation of Rawlsian and Habermasian paradigms of political philosophy that offers an interpretation and defense of Habermas's theory of law and ...

I outline Rawls's theory of justification, highlighting its philosophical and pragmatic conditions. I argue that the theory has remained essentially unchanged since his earliest methodological writings, and that his recent writings have sought to show how "justice as fairness" can satisfy these conditions, given Rawls's new construal of the "fact of pluralism" which theories of justice designed for modern Western liberal democracies must address. I argue that neither Rawls's revised conception of reflective equilibrium, based on the "fixed points" of such (...) societies' political cultures rather than on individuals' "considered moral judgments" nor the newer notion of "overlapping consensus", succeed in justifying "justice as fairness" according to the terms of Rawls's theory of justification. (shrink)