Rawlsian Constructivism: A Practical Guide to Reflective Equilibrium

Author:

Brandstedt EricORCID,Brännmark Johan

Abstract

AbstractMany normative theorists want to contribute to making the world a better place. In recent years, it has been suggested that to realise this ambition one must start with an adequate description of real-life practices. To determine what should be done, however, one must also fundamentally criticise existing moral beliefs. The method of reflective equilibrium offers a way of doing both. Yet, its practical usefulness has been doubted and it has been largely ignored in the recent practical turn of normative theorising. This paper offers a complementary methodology to the method of reflective equilibrium, referred to as Rawlsian constructivism, which brings forth its practical merits. With the support of Rawlsian constructivism, the method of reflective equilibrium becomes a tool for public reasoning about practical problems which aims to facilitate shared solutions. The process of reflective scrutiny is used, not in the search of moral truth, but rather to highlight what stands in the way of solutions to problems agents face in different domains of social life. The practical value lies in scrutinising reasons for action that are taken for granted, explicating new rationales for action and highlighting neglected points of agreement. The paper exemplifies this approach with a process of justifying individual obligations to combat climate change. Normative theorists who share the practical agenda have correctly noted the importance of bottom-up investigations of subject domains. This paper argues that the next step should be to utilise this version of the method of reflective equilibrium to explore the potential for morally progressive solutions to these problems.

Funder

Swedish Research Council

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Philosophy

Reference38 articles.

1. Arras, John. 2007. The way we reason now: Reflective equilibrium in bioethics. In The Oxford handbook of bioethics, ed. B. Steinbock. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

2. Arras, John. 2016. Theory and bioethics. In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2016 Edition), ed. Edward N. Zalta. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/theory-bioethics/.

3. Baderin, Alice. 2017. Reflective equilibrium: Individual or public? Social Theory and Practice 43(1): 1–28.

4. Brink, David O. 1987. Rawlsian constructivism in moral theory. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 17(1): 71–90.

5. Brun, Georg. 2017. Conceptual re-engineering: From explication to reflective equilibrium, Synthese, online first, 1–30.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3