I haven’t had a chance to read it yet, but this paper on how Rawls and Nozick’s inferences from the fact of the “separateness of persons” derive from differing conceptions of personhood. I’ll note in advance, though, that as a partisan of the later-Rawls’ program for a neutralist, political-not-metaphysical theory of justice, I would far prefer not to have key points of theory turn on contentious questions about the nature of the self, to the extent that it’s possible to bracket such questions.
Separateness of Persons
February 27th, 2008 · 3 Comments
Tags: General Philosophy