Holly Lawford-Smith’s brief article, “Ideal Theory—A Reply to Valentini”, is exactly what it sounds like: a concise reply to Laura Valentini’s “On The Apparent Paradox of Ideal Theory”. Valentini, as I summarize elsewhere, outlines a paradox consisting of three premises: Any sound theory of justice must be (1) action-guiding and (2) ideal, but (3) any … Continue reading Holly Lawford-Smith, “Ideal Theory—A Reply to Valentini”→| Political Not Metaphysical
In recent years, political philosophers have started to pay more attention to methodology, largely to due pressure from the charge that political philosophy is too detached to really guide political action Many of theses methodological debates have clustered together under the heading ideal/non-ideal theory. In this article, Laura Valentini argues—I think rightly—that the debate about … Continue reading Laura Valentini, Ideal vs. Non-Ideal Theory: A Conceptual Map→| Political Not Metaphysical
In “Ideal and NonIdeal Theory”, A. John Simmons takes up the familiar distinction Rawlsian distinction, a distinction Simmons thinks has not received enough “sustained attention”. His aim is to “rationally reconstruct” Rawls’s position on the distinction, defend Rawls’s approach against alternatives, and reply to some criticisms of Rawls’s approach. Rawls’s Ideal Theory Rawls divides any … Continue reading A. John Simmons, Ideal and Nonideal Theory→| Political Not Metaphysical
Whether markets help cause or exacerbate famines is one of the great questions of political economy. Cormac Ó Gráda’s recent book Eating People is Wrong, and Other Essays on Famine, its Past,…| pseudoerasmus