Good morning, readers! Welcome back!

To get us started this week, here’s a fascinating piece I found via Bookforum.com a few weeks ago — “John Rawls: On My Religion: How Rawls’s political philosophy was influenced by his religion,” by Joshua Cohen and Thomas Nagel.

VERY interesting, especially if you are studying Rawls.  Do check it out.

Update 4/8/2009: Here’s a follow-up piece, from the New Republic, “Driven Up the Rawls,” by William Galston.

Good morning, readers!

Here are the January 2009 Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews.  Though collection development is on hold for the time being at Robbins, are any of these worth considering for purchase at a later date?

Aesthetics

Philosophers

Metaphysics

Epistemology

History of Philosophy

Moral & Political Philosophy

Philosophy of Law

Philosophy of Religion

Philosophy of Science

Via Bookforum.com: Martha Nussbaum examines John Rawls’ work (especially A Theory of Justice and Political Liberalism) in light of religious pluralism — this article is, in my view, an excellent précis of Rawls’ political philosophy.

Martin O’Neill (University of Manchester) examines Rawls’ notion of “property-owning democracy” in “Liberty, Equality, and Property-Owning Democracy.”

Here is the abstract of the paper:

This paper investigates the cogency of Rawls’s hostility towards ‘welfare-state capitalism’ and his advocacy of ‘property-owning democracy’ as an alternative to capitalism. I argue that the strongest arguments in support of property-owning democracy are connected to the demands of Rawls’s difference principle. I argue that Rawls’s overall argument against the acceptability of ‘welfare-state capitalism’ is ultimately successful, but it is best understood in relation to his account of the badness of inequality. I nevertheless raise a number of problems for those lines of argument for
‘property-owning democracy’ that work through the principles of fair equality of opportunity or of fair value of the political liberties.

A hat-tip to Bookforum.com for this article.

Good morning, readers! And a happy Friday to you all!

In my travels around cyberspace last week, I discovered four great articles on philosophical practice:

A hat-tip to Bookforum.com for these links.

John Rawls

Good morning, readers! Happy Friday!

For those interested in political philosophy, John Rawls (at left) is one of the most important figures of the late 20th century. Justice as Fairness, A Theory of Justice, The Law of Peoples, and Political Liberalism are important texts for students of political philosophy. For those readers unfamiliar with Rawls’ work, Leif Weinar provides an excellent overview of Rawls’ work in the heading to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy article on Rawls:

[Rawls] was an American political philosopher in the liberal tradition. His theory of justice as fairness envisions a society of free citizens holding equal basic rights cooperating within an egalitarian economic system. His account of political liberalism addresses the legitimate use of political power in a democracy, aiming to show how enduring unity may be achieved despite the diversity of worldviews that free institutions allow. His writings on the law of peoples extend these theories to liberal foreign policy, with the goal of imagining how a peaceful and tolerant international order might be possible.

Robert NozickLikewise, Robert Nozick (at right) is also of interest for contemporary students of political philosophy. (For those readers who do not know, Rawls and Nozick were colleagues here in the philosophy department at Harvard.) Nozick’s book, Anarchy, State, and Utopia is a libertarian response to Rawls’ A Theory of Justice. Readers interested in learning more might want to read Peter Vallentyne’s entry on libertarianism in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

From the little that I have read, and through conversations I’ve had here with members of the department over the last few years, Rawls and Nozick are usually viewed as having two different approaches to political philosophy. So, when I was skimming through Bookforum.com a few days ago, this article by David Lewis Schaefer, comparing Rawls’ and Nozick’s political philosophy caught my attention. Schaefer makes the claim that Rawls and Nozick do not differ as much as they are sometimes made out to differ. In fact, Schaefer claims, they are similar in many respects.

I have not read much by either Rawls or Nozick, so I am in no position to judge the accuracy of Schaefer’s claims. What do my readers who are better versed in these matters think of Schaefer’s claims?

Cy Young Baseball cardAt right: Cy Young baseball card, 1911; a public domain image from the Library of Congress

Opening day for baseball season is less than two weeks away. Thus, it seems appropriate to include Owen Fiss’ introduction and inclusion of a letter by John Rawls on baseball. (The text of the letter, along with a PDF facsimile of the original, can be found in the Boston Review.)

In this letter, Rawls recounts a conversation that he had with the legal scholar, Harry Kalven, in which Kalven speaks about why baseball is the best of all games. It is an amazing letter to read. Furthermore, as Fiss notes in his introduction, how both Rawls and Kalven used baseball examples to make technical points in some of their work.

And now, for something completely different – In an earlier post, I wrote about philosophical autobiography. Continuing the thread of the idea in that post, I include, for your viewing pleasure today, Alain Badiou’s fascinating discussion of philosophy as biography as found in the most recent issue of The Symptom.

A hat-tip to Bookforum.com for these articles.

For those interested in ethics, moral philosophy, and political philosophy, these reviews might be of interest.

On Bernard Williams

Lisa Hague (University of Kent) reviews Alan Thomas (ed.), Bernard Williams, Cambridge University Press, 2007, for Metapsychology Online Reviews.

Hague outlines the seven essays included in this volume, whose authors are, respectively: Adrian Moore, Alan Thomas, John Skorupski, Robert B. Louden, Michael Stocker, Tony Long, and Edward Craig. She writes, “The seven papers assess his work on moral realism, moral objectivity, the nature of practical reason, moral emotion, the critique of the ‘morality system’, Williams’ assessment of the ethical thought of the ancient world, and his work on Nietzsche’s method of ‘genealogy’.”

On John Rawls

Arthur Kuflik (University of Vermont) reviews Thomas Pogge’s John Rawls: His Life and Theory of Justice for Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews.

A hat-tip to Bookforum.com for both of these reviews.

Enjoy your weekend, folks!