Does He Mean What He Says? (Mis)Understanding Rawls's Practical Turn

Abstract

Many political theorists interpret John Rawls's current work on the practical tasks of political philosophy as yielding a less ambitious theory than advanced in A Theory of Justice. This article contends that such criticisms rest on conflating his use of justice as fairness as the logical foundation for an argument with a claim that justice as fairness expresses substantive truth. The author argues that Rawls makes no such foundational claim, and that his current political philosophy is more ambitious because it requires citizens to actively develop and maintain consensus on justice as fairness as their first political organizing principle.