Economics Dictionary of Arguments

Home Screenshot Tabelle Begriffe

 
Perfectionism: Perfectionism in political philosophy advocates for societal goals or values aiming at achieving an ideal conception of human excellence or flourishing. It asserts that governments should actively promote specific conceptions of the good life, fostering conditions that enable individuals to reach their highest potential. See also Society, Perfection, Politics.
_____________
Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments.

 
Author Concept Summary/Quotes Sources

John Rawls on Perfectionism - Dictionary of Arguments

I 325
Perfectionism/Principle of Perfection/Rawls: two variants: a) the principle of a teleological theory that leads a society to build institutions and shape the duties and obligations of individuals in such a way that outstanding achievements in the arts, sciences and culture are achieved.
>Teleology
.
b) (to be found in Aristotle and others) has more ambitious goals: here the principle of perfection is only one of several principles within an intuitionistic theory.
>Intuitionism.
The demands of perfection can even diminish for example, demands that are made on the maintenance of freedoms, e.g. when it is argued that slavery serves the goal of cultural refinement.
On the other hand, it can only be a question of dividing social wealth into different areas, e. g. culture,...
I 326
... then egalitarian ideas become balanced. This less strict certainty allows for a variety of interpretations(1)(2)(3).
Terminology/Rawls: we assume,
Def Ideality-driven principles/ideal-regarding principles: are those that are not wish-driven(4).
In other words, they are not only concerned with the distribution of a society's total wealth among needs that need to be satisfied. Then the principles of justice and perfection belong to the realm of idealistic principles.
>Principles/Rawls.
I 327
Contract doctrine/Rawls: holds onto an intermediate position between utilitarianism and perfectionism by not pretending to be a standard ideal of human excellence.
>Utilitarianism.
Perfectionism: if he wants to have a criterion of perfection, he must try to rank achievements and try to sum up their values.
Problem/RawlsVsPerfectionism: in the initial situation of a society to be built, we assume that people initially have no mutual interest in each other; however, they know that they have certain moral and religious interests and also other cultural ideas that should not be put at risk. They can also have conflicting attitudes towards the aspirant.
((s) They just do not know what position they will take later in this society.)
Problem: Assuming standards of perfection could lead to having to give up other freedoms, e. g. regarding religion.
>Veil of ignorance, >Society/Rawls.
I 328
The case here is completely different from the question of the principles according to which primary public goods (freedoms, infrastructure, etc.) are to be distributed! The latter are goods that everyone will strive for, regardless of their position.
>Public Good/Rawls.
In other words, striving for these goods makes no distinction between people.
Criteria/perfection/Rawls: the criteria of excellence have not seen a rational basis from the point of view of daily life. On the other hand, within the arts and sciences there are standards for assessing achievements.
Comparability: intrinsic values can obviously be compared. Value judgments have an important place in human life. They do not have to be vague.
>Comparisons, >Comparability.
Justice/value judgments/art/science/Rawls: the argument against perfectionism is rather that because of the different goals of the aspirations, the participants in the initial position of a society to be established have no reason to adopt the principle of perfection ((s) instead of the principles of justice).
>Justice/Rawls.

1. See B. de Jouvenal, The Ethics of Redistribution (Cambridge, 1951), S.53-56, 62-65.
2. Hastings Rashdall, The Theory of Good and Evil (London, 1907), vol. I, pp. 235-243.
3. G.E. Moore, Principia Ethica, ch. VI.
4. See Brian Barry, Political Argument, (London, 1965) pp. 39f.

_____________
Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. Translations: Dictionary of Arguments
The note [Concept/Author], [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] resp. "problem:"/"solution:", "old:"/"new:" and "thesis:" is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition.

Rawl I
J. Rawls
A Theory of Justice: Original Edition Oxford 2005


Send Link

Authors A   B   C   D   E   F   G   H   I   J   K   L   M   N   O   P   Q   R   S   T   U   V   W   Z  


Concepts A   B   C   D   E   F   G   H   I   J   K   L   M   N   O   P   Q   R   S   T   U   V   W   Z