authors:
- Gaus, Gerald F
content: 'This is not an easily read book. It assumes quite some previous knowledge
about political philosophy on the part of the reader, and it occasionally formalizes
its arguments that perhaps makes them more strict, but also harder to follow.
That said, its investigation and critique of "ideal theory", the notion that political
and moral philosophy should attempt to find a blueprint or a set of criteria for
a just society, is convincing. The main target of criticism is John Rawls and his
theory about Justice as Fairness. Starting from an argument by Amartya Sen, Gaus
claims that an ideal theory must contain some kind of orientation aspect, i.e. a
statement on in which direction, so to speak, a just society lies. This statement
must be something other than just saying that we given our starting state should
move to the next available better state. Gaus argues that any ideal theory faces
what he calls "The Choice", that is, there must be occasions where the ideal theory
concludes that we should *not* move to the next available better state, because
that would bring us further from the ideal state that is has previously identified.
Gaus doesn''t say so, but this actually boils down to the statement by Lenin that
one must break eggs to make an omelet. Which highlights the problem with "The Choice".
Gaus goes on to argue that ideal theory has an additional difficult problem if the
state that it identifies as ideal is very different from anything we know. If there
is something that has been learnt over the last 200 years or so, it is that attempts
at achieving some perfect ideal society inevitably goes wrong.
Gaus discusses the problems with the Open Society, drawing on arguments by Karl
Popper and Friedrich Hayek, among others. He states that we should welcome the different
views on justice that an Open Society brings. Different perspectives can search,
share, debate and dismiss each other''s insights while engaging in cooperative social
relations. My concern here is the difficulty in maintaining those cooperative social
relations. The last 10 years or so have seen an erosion in social relations in several
Western democracies. This book, written before 2016, is, I fear, a little too optimistic.
In conclusion, there are many interesting arguments in this book, but it does not
really add up to a standalone philosophy. His critique of political philosophy in
general is at times ascerbic, but I must say I agree with him. Maybe Gerald Gaus
last book, The Open Society and Its Complexities, will bring more to the table.
I will read it next.'
date: '2022-09-09'
edition:
published: '2016'
publisher: Princeton University Press
goodreads: '27311863'
html: '<p>This is not an easily read book. It assumes quite some previous knowledge
about political philosophy on the part of the reader, and it occasionally formalizes
its arguments that perhaps makes them more strict, but also harder to follow.</p>
<p>That said, its investigation and critique of "ideal theory", the notion
that political and moral philosophy should attempt to find a blueprint or a set
of criteria for a just society, is convincing. The main target of criticism is John
Rawls and his theory about Justice as Fairness. Starting from an argument by Amartya
Sen, Gaus claims that an ideal theory must contain some kind of orientation aspect,
i.e. a statement on in which direction, so to speak, a just society lies. This statement
must be something other than just saying that we given our starting state should
move to the next available better state. Gaus argues that any ideal theory faces
what he calls "The Choice", that is, there must be occasions where the
ideal theory concludes that we should <em>not</em> move to the next available better
state, because that would bring us further from the ideal state that is has previously
identified. Gaus doesn''t say so, but this actually boils down to the statement
by Lenin that one must break eggs to make an omelet. Which highlights the problem
with "The Choice".</p>
<p>Gaus goes on to argue that ideal theory has an additional difficult problem if
the state that it identifies as ideal is very different from anything we know. If
there is something that has been learnt over the last 200 years or so, it is that
attempts at achieving some perfect ideal society inevitably goes wrong.</p>
<p>Gaus discusses the problems with the Open Society, drawing on arguments by Karl
Popper and Friedrich Hayek, among others. He states that we should welcome the different
views on justice that an Open Society brings. Different perspectives can search,
share, debate and dismiss each other''s insights while engaging in cooperative social
relations. My concern here is the difficulty in maintaining those cooperative social
relations. The last 10 years or so have seen an erosion in social relations in several
Western democracies. This book, written before 2016, is, I fear, a little too optimistic.</p>
<p>In conclusion, there are many interesting arguments in this book, but it does
not really add up to a standalone philosophy. His critique of political philosophy
in general is at times ascerbic, but I must say I agree with him. Maybe Gerald Gaus
last book, The Open Society and Its Complexities, will bring more to the table.
I will read it next.</p>
'
isbn: '9780691158808'
language: en
lastmod: '2022-09-09'
path: /library/gaus-2016.html
published: '2016'
rating: 4
reference: Gaus 2016
reviewed: '2022-09-09'
subjects:
- liberalism
- morality
- political-philosophy
title: 'The Tyranny of the Ideal: Justice in a Diverse Society'
type: book
year: 2016