Abstract
The question regarding the relationship between ethics and politics has always occupied the minds of philosophers and political theorists. Thomas Nagel is one philosopher among others who clearly draws a close link between the ethical and the political. Accordingly, Nagel’s inquiry on the issues of objectivity and subjectivity is providing the readers not only with ethical but also political insights regarding the matter. On the other hand, John Rawls’s ideas of an “original position” and a “veil of ignorance” in their relation to his understanding of political justice, similarly, interrogate the possibility of an alternative perspective for an objective standpoint that recognizes and encompasses individuality while offering a model for a political community which is founded upon impartial principles. Although Rawls’s discussion is mainly contractual and strictly political, certain aspects of his works on political justice and liberalism might be reconsidered in an investigation which also engages with issues in morality and ethics. Therefore, the present study will attempt at reading Nagel’s discussion of objectivity and impartiality from an ethico-political standpoint which juxtaposes ‘the view from nowhere’ with Rawlsian “veil of ignorance”. For this, relevant arguments of both philosophers will be explored in a comparative manner while highlighting potential parallelisms between the two.
Keywords
References
- Freeman, S. (2003). The Cambridge Companion to Rawls. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Nagel, T. (1973). Rawls On Justice. The Philosophical Review, 82(2), 220-234. https://doi.org/10.2307/2183770
- Nagel, T. (1987). Moral Conflict and Political Legitimacy. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 16(3), 215–240.
- http://www.jstor.org/stable/2265265
- Nagel, T. (1987). What Does It All Mean? A Very Short Introduction to Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Nagel, T. (1989). The View From Nowhere. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Rawls, J. (1999). A Theory of Justice: Revised Edition. USA: Harvard University Press.
- Rawls, J. (2005). Political Liberalism: Expanded Edition. New York: Columbia University Press.
- Sleat, M. (2015). Justice and Legitimacy in Contemporary Liberal Thought: A Critique. Social Theory and
- Practice, 41(2), 230–252. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24332279
- Thomas, A. (2009). Thomas Nagel. Stocksfield: Acumen Publishing
- Verza, A. (1999). Impartiality in the Liberal Theories of Rawls and Nagel. ARSP: Archiv Für Rechts- Und
- Sozialphilosophie / Archives for Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy, 85(2), 222-232.
- http://www.jstor.org/stable/23681324
Abstract
Etik ve siyaset arasındaki ilişkiye dair sorular tarih boyunca kuramcıların zihinlerini meşgul etmiştir. Etik ve siyasal olan arasındaki ilişkiyi en açık şekilde dile getiren filozoflardan biri de Thomas Nagel’dir. Buna göre denilebilir ki Nagel’in öznellik ve nesnellik üzerine soruşturmaları yalnızca etik alanında değil, siyasal düşünce bakımından da önemli noktalara değinmektedir. Öte yandan liberal siyaset kuramının önemli isimlerinden olan John Rawls’un başlangıç durumu ve bilgisizlik peçesi önerileri de siyasal adalet anlayışı ile ilişkili olarak benzer şekilde tekliği tanıyan bir nesnellik düşüncesine işaret eder. Her ne kadar Rawls’un sözleşmeci düşüncesi özellikle siyasal bir tabandan yükselmiş olsa da tarafsız ilkelere dayanan bir cemiyetin olanağını sorgulayan, siyasal adalet ve liberalizm üzerine çalışmalarının belli başlı uğrakları etik ve ahlak alanındaki bir soruşturma kapsamında yeniden değerlendirilebilir. Bu çalışma, bu noktalardan yola çıkarak, ilkin Nagel’in tarafsızlık ve nesnellik kuramını etik-siyasal bir pencereden okumayı hedeflemektedir. İkinci olarak Nagel’in ‘hiç yerden bakış’ anlayışının Rawls’un ‘bilgisizlik perdesi’ fikri ile bir arada yeniden düşünülmesi amaçlanmaktadır. Buna göre her iki filozofun ilgili tartışmaları karşılaştırmalı bir biçimde ele alınırken söz konusu tartışmalar arasındaki belli paralelliklerin de altı çizilecektir
Keywords
References
- Freeman, S. (2003). The Cambridge Companion to Rawls. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Nagel, T. (1973). Rawls On Justice. The Philosophical Review, 82(2), 220-234. https://doi.org/10.2307/2183770
- Nagel, T. (1987). Moral Conflict and Political Legitimacy. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 16(3), 215–240.
- http://www.jstor.org/stable/2265265
- Nagel, T. (1987). What Does It All Mean? A Very Short Introduction to Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Nagel, T. (1989). The View From Nowhere. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Rawls, J. (1999). A Theory of Justice: Revised Edition. USA: Harvard University Press.
- Rawls, J. (2005). Political Liberalism: Expanded Edition. New York: Columbia University Press.
- Sleat, M. (2015). Justice and Legitimacy in Contemporary Liberal Thought: A Critique. Social Theory and
- Practice, 41(2), 230–252. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24332279
- Thomas, A. (2009). Thomas Nagel. Stocksfield: Acumen Publishing
- Verza, A. (1999). Impartiality in the Liberal Theories of Rawls and Nagel. ARSP: Archiv Für Rechts- Und
- Sozialphilosophie / Archives for Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy, 85(2), 222-232.
- http://www.jstor.org/stable/23681324
Details
| Primary Language | English |
|---|---|
| Subjects | Cultural Studies, Philosophy |
| Journal Section | Research Articles |
| Authors | |
| Publication Date | June 29, 2023 |
| Submission Date | April 14, 2023 |
| Published in Issue | Year 2023 Issue: 11 |
“Journal of Social and Cultural Studies” (J-SCS) is published in Turkish and English. “Journal of Social and Cultural Studies” (J-SCS) is published only in electronic form through its website and adopts open access policy. The journal is published twice a year, in June and December. No fees are charged for publications, no fees are paid to the editors, the editorial board and the referees and their owners. It is accepted that the authors who submit articles to the contact address for publication in the journal should read and acknowledge this copyright statement.
“Journal of Social and Cultural Studies” is open to the work of all researchers who have the title “PhD” or “PhD student”. It is not obligatory that the second, third and fourth authors of the article have the title “PhD” or “PhD student”. An article should has been written by max. four authors. The articles prepared in accordance with the writing rules are presented to the referee for review after they have passed the editorial review. The reviewer may ask for a correction to the article, directly refuse or accept it. For the articles declined as a result of the reviewer evaluation, a second reviewer may be requested by the author, If the editors’ board finds that the request is appropriate, the article will be sent to a second reviewer.
The articles previously published in another publication or in the evaluation stage by another publication are not accepted into “Journal of Social and Cultural Studies” publication process. All the ethical and legal responsibilities related to the published articles belong to the authors.