Join today and start reading your favorite books for Free!
Rate this book!
Write a review?
Hampshire's individual points were spectacular (particularly his application of omnis determinatio est negatio), but, overall, he's the world's most optimistic pessimist. He imagines that justice can be achieved by audi alteram partem or hearing both sides of the issue. This is foolish, because he assumes that his "procedural justice" will appropriately satisfy everyone. But it won't because it's a subjective justice. When asked to defend his sense of justice and morality, he evades this by sayi...
My dear friend should try again to explain why this work says anything worthy of note. A brief and admittedly untidy sketch of my concern:Acknowledging reasonable pluralism is necessary. But the acknowledgment is the beginning of the required effort, not the end. When we acknowledge that rationality does not produce harmony (something like a consensus), we must then actually address how decisions are to be made--and made fairly--so that a political harmony can prevail. Hampshire argues for a lim...