[PEN-L:32579] Re: Re: RE: Re: John Rawls

[enilsson@xxxxxxxxx]

Louis wrote,
> The reason it sounds individualistic is because it is rooted
>in Kant. It is really an updating of the notion of the categorical
>imperative . . .

and

>It was only after being exposed to Marxism that I figured out
> that it was nonsensical to talk about justice without talking about
> political economy.

This dropping of names still shows a failure to understand Rawls. Saint
Karl himself assumed that eventually classes would disappear and, with
this, the need for political economy would disappear.

Rawls in his theory of justice talked about a similar situation: no
classes exist in the initial situation he wrote about and, at the
beginning of the analysis, political economy is not relevant. (What Rawls
might have envisoned later on in his theory raises other issues).

News flash: Rawls was not a Marxist; Rawls failed to reject (in fact
built upon) the individualist perspective of Kant; BUT Rawls still made a
major contribution to the understanding of justice and political theory.

Likely my last posting on this issue.

Eric Nilsson