« On Vindictive Referees | Main | Rawls, Paul's Transformative Experience, and Life plans. »



Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Charles Blattberg

Excellent post! I take it that, adopting Bernard Yack's distinction (https://ndpr.nd.edu/reviews/philosophy-between-the-lines-the-lost-history-of-esoteric-writing/) between the more common, mild form of esoterism and that rare form in which the writer conceals an argument that's a subversive counter to the exoteric one, you would agree that Rawls never comes close to doing the latter? Otherwise put: he's consistently serious, rather than ironic or playful, about his explicit claims.

Eric Schliesser

Hi Charles,
Yes, I think there is an important distinction between an esoteric doctrine that opposes the public one, and those that may add something to their exoteric arguments. (I wouldn't call that 'mild' always.) I have no evidence that Rawls is concealing his views in the former way.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Here's a link to my past blogging (and discussions involving me) at: New APPS.


Blog powered by Typepad