|Rawls I 215
Tolerance/Rousseau/Rawls: when reasons for limiting tolerance are given, they often violate the principle of freedom. For example, Rousseau thought that people would not consider it possible to live together in peace with others whom they considered condemned. For loving them would be tantamount to hating God who punishes them. Anyone who looks at others as damned would have to fight or convert them according to Rousseau.
RawlsVsRousseau: Rousseau would not tolerate those religions which say that there is no redemption outside the church. (See Rousseau, The Social Contract, bk. IV, ch. VIII.)
Rawls: but the consequences are not based on experience. An a priori psychological argument, however plausible, is not sufficient to give up tolerance. Justice, on the other hand, assumes that disturbances of public order or freedom are detected in community experience._____________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. The note [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition.
J. J. Rousseau
Les Confessions, 1765-1770, publ. 1782-1789
The Confessions 1953
A Theory of Justice: Original Edition Oxford 2005