Re: HAB: rawls vs. habermas

[delfin ignacio grueso <dgrueso@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

	Yes Seneca, I am interested in that discussion. I think the debate
Rawls-Habermas is mostly around the notion of politics used by Rawls and
its implication in the justificatory and normative claims that Rawls
makes.

	I would pick three issues among the many put by Habermas. 1.
Rawls's contention that the political is a self-standing realm. 2. the
notion of legitimation that Rawls might be using. 3. The scope of
democracy. About these three issues Habermas rise important criticisms
that, I would say, remain without a satisfactory response from the
Rawlsian side. I invite you and others to review them.

	Basically, I would say that Rawls's reduction of the politics to
classic liberal politics (based upon the exclusion of the ethical,
cultural, and other substantive issues from the strictly political) is
what bothers Habermas. This is for him a restrictive notion of the
political that, by trying to keep in a rather dogmatic way the separation
between right and good, ends up denying any connection between a
particular conception of the public and some substantive values that could
be considered "comprehensive notions of the good". This is, on the other
hand, a critique made to Rawls's contention of settling his 'political
liberalism' beyond the realm of ethical discussions. SUch a critique has
been also made by Waldron, Mulhal&Swift, Thomas McCarty, Chantal Mouffe,
and David Dyzenhaus.

	Well Seneca. This is just an opening statement that could be
developed later. I would like to see how others perceive this debate.


	Best,

		Delfin

On Thu, 27 May 1999, seneca savoie wrote:

> i am coming to the close of rawls' POLITCAL LIBERALISM where a little under a
> hundred pages in answer to habermas' criticisms of his theory of justice. as the
>
> book mentions, the rebuttal is written with somone has read the orignal critique
>
> in mind. being partial to mr. rawls myself, i was wondering if anyone out there
> had read the article, and even if not, would be willing to start up our own
> discusion on the relative strengths/weaknesses of the two theories. for those
> interested, the title of habermas' article is "reconcilliation through the
> publec use of reason: Remarks on john rawls' political liberalism"
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> FREE - yourname@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx - Just visit http://www.philosophers.net
>
>
>      --- from list habermas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
>