Freedom and Equality in a Pluralist Society: An Explanation and Defence of the Public Reason View

Abstract

The paper is dedicated to replies to Christiano’s criticism of Rawlsian public reason. Although Christiano’s criticism is successful in relation to one possible interpretation of the public reason view, a better and more fructuous interpretation of the public reason view is at the disposition of the Rawlsian project. This view of public reason is deliberately an idealization. It shows how public justification would function in a well-ordered society where citizens are committed to liberal values. The shared reasons relevant for public justification are represented by the ideal of society as a fair system of cooperation between free and equal citizens, as well as by the three features of the liberal conceptions of justice (basic rights and liberties, their priority, and the means to use them). In virtue of this view of public reason, it avoids Christiano’s objection of the utopianism of shared reasons, and it replies to the inequality argument, as well as to the generality and vagueness objection, and the inconsistency argument. The advantages of the proposal in the view of public reason, in comparison to Christiano’s proceduralist democratic proposal, are shown in the reply to the inequality argument.

Keywords

• Christiano
• democracy
• public reason
• Quong
• Rawls