Rawls and Classist Amoralism

Abstract

John Rawls tries to get more out of rationality vis-d-vis morality than the traffic will bear. A member of the most favoured class even in a well-ordered society might very well come to recognize that it is in his interest and in the interests of the other members of his class to act as men of good morals and not as morally good men; that is to say, he might well come to see that acting in accordance with the principles of justice which rational men would adopt in the original position is not in his interest or in the interests of most of the members of his class. There could be a recognition by such men that these principles are, when everyone is considered, collectively rational and it could be further recognized that they should take pains to appear to be moral and to use morality as an ideological device to strengthen the class interests of that favoured class, but such men could realize they need not be just men or even aspire to be just men. What is rational in terms of their class interests is not identical with what is collectively rational. Given the received conception of rationality-the morally neutral conception of rationality utilized by Rawls-they would not be acting irrationally in so overriding moral considerations. Their thoroughly class point of view need not involve any failure of intellect on their part at all. The link between morality and reason is not that tight. Some may agree that the above claim is at least roughly correct, but deny that Rawls is actually concerned to deny it. They will claim that Rawls is only concerned to argue for the convergence of goodness, justice and rationality. He is arguing that people in a well-ordered society will not find it irrational to be just men. Rationality does not require a commitment to the principles of morality, but it is compatible with such a commitment. It is my belief that Rawls is mraking a stronger claim; he is, as I read him, claiming that the amoralist, including what I call 'the classist amoralist', suffers some failure in rationality in rejecting the moral point of view. A human being who is through and through rational would not be an amoralist.