Skip to main content

A Pluralist Critique of Contractarian Proceduralism

Buy Article:

$43.00 plus tax (Refund Policy)

In pluralistic societies with conflicting conceptions of the good, purely procedural justice looms as particularly attractive. Moreover, the social contract device, in at least some of its conceptual adaptations, appears capable of yielding purely procedural outcomes. Based on an assessment of the respective contractarian arguments of Hobbes and Rawls, the author asserts that contractarian proceduralism is either purely procedural but not just, or else just but only derivatively procedural. Finally, after proposing that Habermas' discourse ethics and proceduralist paradigm of law can be regarded as the perfection and culmination of contractarianism, the author concludes that it also ultimately fails to produce purely procedural justice.
No References
No Citations
No Supplementary Data
No Article Media
No Metrics

Document Type: Research Article

Affiliations: Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, Yeshiva University, 55 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10003, USA.

Publication date: 1998-12-01

  • Access Key
  • Free content
  • Partial Free content
  • New content
  • Open access content
  • Partial Open access content
  • Subscribed content
  • Partial Subscribed content
  • Free trial content
Cookie Policy
Cookie Policy
Ingenta Connect website makes use of cookies so as to keep track of data that you have filled in. I am Happy with this Find out more