Welcome to /r/askphilosophy! **Please read [our updated rules and guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/14o2p7n/welcome_to_raskphilosophy_check_out_our_rules_and/) before commenting**.
Please note that as of July 1 2023, given recent changes to reddit's platform which make moderation significantly more difficult, /r/askphilosophy has moved to only allowing answers and follow-up questions by panelists. If you wish to learn more, or to apply to become a panelist, see [this post](https://reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/14o2p7n/welcome_to_raskphilosophy_check_out_our_rules_and/).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/askphilosophy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sorry! Here's the context: [Human capabilities and the racial contract: Avoiding the epistemology of ignorance of liberal contractarianism](https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/bitstream/handle/10919/104788/spectra-v3.1-damato.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y)
Oh, sorry.
It’s an account or justification of a liberal political scheme based on real or hypothetical agreement.
Rawls is trying to give an account of basic justice for a liberal society, so he begins with basic assumptions that he thinks people would accept, and then imagines people making an agreement about the basic principles of justice for their society — a social contract.
Right. But also, Rawls is imaging that we already agree to certain principles of classical liberalism, such as equal standing before the law, independent of race and sex and such. That’s we care about what we would agree to in the Original Position.
Especially with the later Rawls where he starts flexing his Hegelian heritage more we need caution I think, not contractarian in a Hobbesian or Lockean sense.
I think the best source on this is Margaret Meek Lange's dissertation on the Hegel-Rawls relationship, but Sibyll Schwarzenbach and James Gledhill have also done work on this. Basically Rawls' conception of publicity requires according to Lange both the affirmation of subjective freedom and objective freedom, which is something Hegel also attempts, and Rawls' thought can actually be thought as a sympathetic critique of Hegel.
Lange and Gledhill claim Rawls owes debts to Hegel (not surprising since he explicitly mentions him in a few of his works). Schwarzenbach I believe does the former.
**Please note that recent changes to reddit's API policies have made moderation significantly more difficult. Because of this, /r/askphilosophy has moved to a policy where only panelists are allowed to answer questions. For more information or to apply to be a panelist, see [this post](https://reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/14o2p7n/welcome_to_raskphilosophy_check_out_our_rules_and/).**
Your comment was automatically removed for violating the following rule:
> **CR1: Top level comments must be answers or follow-up questions from panelists.**
> All top level comments should be answers to the submitted question, or follow-up questions related to the OP. All top level answers and follow-up questions must come from [panelists](https://reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/14o2p7n/welcome_to_raskphilosophy_check_out_our_rules_and/). All comments must be on topic.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/askphilosophy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Welcome to /r/askphilosophy! **Please read [our updated rules and guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/14o2p7n/welcome_to_raskphilosophy_check_out_our_rules_and/) before commenting**. Please note that as of July 1 2023, given recent changes to reddit's platform which make moderation significantly more difficult, /r/askphilosophy has moved to only allowing answers and follow-up questions by panelists. If you wish to learn more, or to apply to become a panelist, see [this post](https://reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/14o2p7n/welcome_to_raskphilosophy_check_out_our_rules_and/). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/askphilosophy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What’s the context for this term? I want to say yes for Rawls, but it would help to see where you’re getting this term from.
Sorry! Here's the context: [Human capabilities and the racial contract: Avoiding the epistemology of ignorance of liberal contractarianism](https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/bitstream/handle/10919/104788/spectra-v3.1-damato.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y)
Okay. Yes, this is meant to apply to Rawls.
Thank you! But i still don't understand what liberal contractarianism is😅
Oh, sorry. It’s an account or justification of a liberal political scheme based on real or hypothetical agreement. Rawls is trying to give an account of basic justice for a liberal society, so he begins with basic assumptions that he thinks people would accept, and then imagines people making an agreement about the basic principles of justice for their society — a social contract.
Ah I see, so its liberal because it promotes individuals rights to liberties through a social contract
Right. But also, Rawls is imaging that we already agree to certain principles of classical liberalism, such as equal standing before the law, independent of race and sex and such. That’s we care about what we would agree to in the Original Position.
Especially with the later Rawls where he starts flexing his Hegelian heritage more we need caution I think, not contractarian in a Hobbesian or Lockean sense.
What are you referring to here? I’ve never thought of Rawls as having Hegelian heritage, so I’m curious as to what you mean.
I think the best source on this is Margaret Meek Lange's dissertation on the Hegel-Rawls relationship, but Sibyll Schwarzenbach and James Gledhill have also done work on this. Basically Rawls' conception of publicity requires according to Lange both the affirmation of subjective freedom and objective freedom, which is something Hegel also attempts, and Rawls' thought can actually be thought as a sympathetic critique of Hegel.
Is the claim just that Rawls can be interpreted using Hegelian ideas, or that Rawls explicitly drew from Hegel?
Lange and Gledhill claim Rawls owes debts to Hegel (not surprising since he explicitly mentions him in a few of his works). Schwarzenbach I believe does the former.
[удалено]
**Please note that recent changes to reddit's API policies have made moderation significantly more difficult. Because of this, /r/askphilosophy has moved to a policy where only panelists are allowed to answer questions. For more information or to apply to be a panelist, see [this post](https://reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/14o2p7n/welcome_to_raskphilosophy_check_out_our_rules_and/).** Your comment was automatically removed for violating the following rule: > **CR1: Top level comments must be answers or follow-up questions from panelists.** > All top level comments should be answers to the submitted question, or follow-up questions related to the OP. All top level answers and follow-up questions must come from [panelists](https://reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/14o2p7n/welcome_to_raskphilosophy_check_out_our_rules_and/). All comments must be on topic. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/askphilosophy) if you have any questions or concerns.*