Perfectionist liberalism: A role for human flourishing in Rawlsian justic

John Rawls's theory of justice as fairness has been the most influential political philosophy in the latter half of the twentieth century. Presented in his two works, A Theory of Justice (1971) and Political Liberalism (1993), it has been credited with helping to return long suppressed normative issues to the philosophical stage. In this dissertation, I will argue for an interpretation of Rawls's theory that incorporates "perfectionism," or the position that the state should take a vested interest in the moral excellence or flourishing of its citizens.;Contemporary versions of liberalism have sought to overcome the fact of reasonable pluralism by extending the spirit of toleration to philosophy itself. This has led to a commitment to "neutrality" whereby the state seeks to justify its decision without appealing to any particular philosophical doctrine. I argue that it is politically impossible and philosophical undesirable to remain "neutral," and that liberalism ought to abandon the ideal of "neutrality" in favor of the concept of "accessibility." This will allow liberalism to discuss matters of private moral excellence without violating its commitment to an artificial ideal.;Yet liberals who openly adopt the label of perfectionism, have tried to derive the principles of moral excellence from the structure of political liberalism itself. This is a mistake, for contemporary liberalism is far too thin and procedural to be the source of any significant doctrine of human flourishing. Instead, perfectionist liberals ought to argue for an account of flourishing that is not derivable from liberalism, but is simply compatible with it. To this end, I suggest that we adopt Martha Nussbaum's account of an "internalist, quasi-essentialism." Her theory employs a philosophical anthropology to establish an account of human flourishing that is strong enough to produce real political decisions, but flexible enough to allow for autonomy and cultural diversity. The result is a perfectionist liberalism that is able to discuss seriously matters of human flourishing while still remaining within Rawlsian liberalism.