20th Century American Liberalism - Essay Example

American Liberalism in the 20th century is an ideology often associated with the philosophy of John Rawls. This idea of individualism and equality isthe basic tenet of this contention in the field of politics. However, two other leading political philosophers of the previous and the present century contributed astute and fresh ideas to the liberal thought instituted by Rawls which in turn made the subject of American Liberalism a more controversial field of study in the present century. Rawls' Lecture II in his book a Theory of Justice put forward ideas on pluralism, individualism, equality and moral psychology (Rawls, 40). However, these ideas were challenged, asserted or weakened by the modern philosophers such as David Ricci and Will Kymlyika as they introduced new thoughts and beliefs with regards individualism, behaviorism and equality in the field of political philosophy. David Ricci, a leading philosopher in the previous century, argued that many political scientists have produced a plethora of literature only to improve their possibilities of tenure and thus, sacrificed rationality in their search of novelty which can give a scholar quick fame and prove her worth in her field. Ricci also argued in his essay Behavioral Persuasion that the rise of behavioral science brought about the decline of political philosophy (Ricci 150). He also contends that the quantity of work on the field of behavioral science has not produced real breakthroughs and that the behavioral scientists failed to see how systems in politics function. This, according to Ricci, resulted to the field's ethical shortcomings as experts in this area studied pseudo-politics and not real politics nor moral agendas applied to the field of politics. On the other hand Will Kymlicka's contributions to the 20th century American Liberalism cannot be discounted as he asserts that liberalism has two characteristics: individualism and egalitarianism. Kymlicka contends that individuals should be viewed as the 'ultimate units of moral worth' and as entities with moral standings. He contends that individuals have equal moral status and thus must be viewed by the government as equal and treated with equitable concern and respect. In theory, as long as individualism or individual rights abused or trampled upon, Kymlicka asserts that collective rights should be allowed but only at the community level. This clearly means that if there is a conflict between individual and collective rights, individual rights should prevail (Kymlicka 122) . Although Kymlica's contentions have their precedence in the works of Rawls especially the pairs of moral principles Rawls suggested in his works, their ideas on individualism do not take parallel paths. In Rawls lecture titled Powers of Citizens and Their Representation, Rawls argued that democratic institutions usually lead to pluralism as our differences and diversity, groupings and ethnic variety often results to divergence in opinions (Rawls 47-88). He added that citizens will mostly disagree on their ideas with regards moral and political question but this pluralism is 'reasonable' in modern society. However, Kymlicka clearly argued that in the conflict of individual and 'plural' rights, the rights of an individual should prevail. This does not mean, nevertheless, that Rawls does not advocate respect of an individual opinion. As a matter of fact, Rawls contends that it is unreasonable to unwillingly acknowledge the claims of others (Rawls 51). For Rawls, disparate philosophies are results of freedom and this should be viewed positively as this lead to a diversity of 'comprehensive philosophical and religious doctrines about the nature of the good or ultimate value'. If this difference leads to arguments, Rawls suggest that these altercations should be viewed favorably as it is always difficult to reach a consensus (Rawls 56-57). On the topic of moral psychology, we will find that Ricci and Rawls have totally disparate assertion. While Ricci 'blames' behaviorism on what he claims as the culprit for thwarting the growth of political philosophy in the previous century, Rawls stressed the importance of psychological justifications which he called 'reflective equilibrium' in order for us to deal and reflect on conflicting morals. This is said to be true as we sometime modify our opinion based on the belief and the prevailing principle we adhere to. Rawls and Ricci also have divergent opinions with regards skepticism. Rawls argues that skepticism must be avoided in order to reach consensus as skepticism only leads to arguments and it is improbable that 'one or more of the necessary conditions of knowledge can never be satisfied.' This is disputed but Ricci, however, when he said that we need to 'doubt credibility' and contest or dispute bureaucratic institutions which define what are acceptable or desirable. He further asserts that we need to help students in identifying what to accept and reject. This means clearly Ricci considred skepticism and critical thinking as crucial to equality and the concept of individualism in society. The concept of liberalism is always controversial and the topics discussed most often evoke arguments and sometimes detestations. However, Rawls concept of a permanent 'pluralism', which, for Rawls is central to liberalism, denotes a strict adherence to the social contract ideology. This version of liberalism seems to commit a notion of political legitimacy in which power is deemed justifiable if such influence is satisfactory to all individuals obligated to it. In this lecture Chapter 2 of Rawls book, the author progressively establishes his principles by suggesting more universal formulations suggesting that these formulations can be construed diversely at various point of arguments, and that the consequence of introducing the superlative analysis of the primary indistinct formulations at each particular point of choice, he would bestow you his favored principles. One of these is Social Inequality. "Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) to the greatest expected benefit of the least advantaged and (b) attached to positions and offices open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity" (Rawls 72). This for me is the most judicious of the principles created by Rawls as the idea of equality is very well defined. However, in his discussions of the basic liberties, Rawls failed to include other freedom that might be valued by other groups or individuals in the society. According to the author, freedom of action should be left to the decision and lawmaking abilities of legislators in a democratic institution. This does not include freedom or liberty to do what one wishes as long as one is not breaking the law. When liberties are left to the discretion of the legislators, liberty should be considered at stake. Ricci pointed this out when he said that we have to dispute what the authorities impose as desirable or acceptable. Although Rawl's ideas of liberalism are celebrated in this century, we also need to see it in effect since we likewise need to apply ideologies into practice. The theory proposed by other philosophers must be tried out in order for our institutions to maximize freedom and equality. WORKS CITED Kymlicka, Will. 'Liberal Equality' in Contemporary Political Philosophy. 2nd. New York: Harpers, 1995. Kymlicka, Will. Multicultural Citizenship: A Liberal Theory of Minority Rights. Oxford: Clarendon. 1995 Kymlicka, Will. "Do We Need a Liberal Theory of Minority Rights Reply to Carens, Young, Parekh and Forst" Constellations Vol. 4 no. 1: 72-87. 1997 Kymlicka, Will. Liberalism, Community and Culture. Oxford: Clarendon. 1987 Rawls, John. Political Liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press. 1993 Rawls, John. Collected Papers. Samuel Freeman, ed. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 1999 Rawls, John. A Theory of Justice. Revised edition (1999) Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 1971 Read More