Institutionalism, Rawls, and Political Development: Theorizing About the Ideal of Institution Building
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 8-2007 Institutionalism, Rawls, and Political Development: Theorizing about the Ideal of Institution Building Shaomeng Li University of Tennessee - Knoxville Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss Part of the Ethics and Political Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation Li, Shaomeng, "Institutionalism, Rawls, and Political Development: Theorizing about the Ideal of Institution Building. " PhD diss., University of Tennessee, 2007. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss/226 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a dissertation written by Shaomeng Li entitled "Institutionalism, Rawls, and Political Development: Theorizing about the Ideal of Institution Building." I have examined the final electronic copy of this dissertation for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, with a major in Philosophy. David Reidy, Major Professor We have read this dissertation and recommend its acceptance: John Hardwig, Richard Aquila, Robert Gorman Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a dissertation written by Shaomeng Li entitled ―Institutionalism, Rawls, and Political Development.‖ I have examined the final electronic copy of this dissertation for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, with a major in Philosophy. __________________________ David Reidy, Major Professor We have read this dissertation and recommend its acceptance: ________________________ John Hardwig, Professor ________________________ Richard Aquila, Professor ________________________ Robert Gorman, Professor Accepted for the Council: __________________________ Carolyn R. Hodges, Vice Provost and Dean of Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official student records.) Institutionalism, Rawls, and Political Development: Theorizing about the Ideal of Institution building A Dissertation Presented for the Doctor of Philosophy Degree The University of Tennessee, Knoxville Shaomeng Li August 2007 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This dissertation owes its right of existence, first and foremost, to all the professors who have taught me at UT, Knoxville. Without their support and encouragement, I wouldn‘t have been able to complete the study for a doctoral degree in Western philosophy, let alone write a dissertation about it in English. Personally I view the journey towards this dissertation as a journey of cultural learning and spiritual refreshment, a journey that was not without struggles, but was nevertheless enjoyable to its smallest moment. The basic ideas of this dissertation sparkled in Dr. David Reidy‘s classes on John Rawls, and the discussions with him thereafter. I always feel grateful that David agreed to be my liaison for the Comprehensive Exam, and my advisor for the dissertation. Working with him added special value to my study here. His intuition on the potential of this project set off this dissertation, while his inspirational feedback on numerous drafts made this dissertation a relatively coherent one. Special thanks are also due to Dr. John Hardwig, Dr. Richard Aquila, and Dr. Robert Gorman. Their comments and suggestions from diverse points of view enriched this dissertation, and guaranteed to it a decent shape. Their separate classes in which I sat were also very helpful in nourishing my philosophical thinking. It is a great honor to have all of these distinguished professors on my dissertation committee. Such an experience will be treasured, along with all the five years of my American life, in my future memory. ii ABSTRACT Philosophers usually seek for and justify moral and political orders by two methodologies. Rationalism claims that social organization of human beings should fit with human nature, and believes that a predefined conception of human nature, defined in terms of human capacities for the exercise of reason, can be established as the independent criterion for choosing and justifying the proper moral and political order. Institutionalism, on the other hand, believes that human nature is at least significantly shaped by the actual construction of moral and political orders by human beings, and by internalizing the social institutions in which they live, they create themselves. In this essay, I argue that rationalism is not a good methodology because it does not reflect the correct relationship between human beings and their institutional life. I will develop a philosophical theory of institutionalism, and argue that an institutionalist justification of the ideal of liberal democracy will encourage a political development towards liberalization and democratization. I will also argue that Rawls‘s justification of liberal democracy is such an institutionalist justification, and although it might seem to suggest otherwise, it not only speaks to citizens of western democracies, but also speaks to all moral persons from all other societies. The political development towards liberalization and democratization is a normative demand for any human society, if such a society strives to be a well-ordered society with long term legitimacy and stability. The exact degree of liberalization and democratization for any particular society will depend on the available means of communication and organization, but the normative demand for such a political development is present in every human society. Institutionalism represents human freedom in human beings‘ creation and justification of social institutions, which are man-made rules and norms aimed at guaranteeing social order among interacting human agents. As a ―liberalism of freedom,‖ institutionalism is therefore committed to a highest ideal of human institution building: institutions of a society should be justified to, and be obeyed by, all the members of this society, so that such a society is a political autonomy. In these terms, Rawls‘s justification of liberal democracy, although dependent on a public political culture of modern western democracies, is nevertheless not limited to this context. As an instantiation of institutionalism, Rawls‘s theory has a dimension of universalism. Ultimately, Rawls‘s justification of liberal democracy encourages every other human society on this earth to develop towards the ideal of liberal democracy. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page Introduction ……………………………………………………………………1 I. Rationalism and Institutionalism……………………………………………10 II. Institutionalism as a Theory………………………………………………..54 III. Institutionalism and Political Development………………………….……99 IV. Rawlsian Institutionalism and Political Development……………………163 References ……………………………………………………………………244 Vita ……………………………………………………………………..…….257 iv Abbreviations for the Works of John Rawls: TJ: A Theory of Justice, revised edition, Harvard University Press, 1999 (Sometimes the first edition of 1971 will also be quoted, as indicated). PL: Political Liberalism, revised edition, Columbia University Press, 1996. CP: Collected Papers, edited by Samuel Freeman, Harvard University Press, 1999. LP: The Law of Peoples, Harvard University Press, 1999. MP: Lectures on the History of Moral Philosophy, edited by Barbara Herman, Harvard University Press, 2000. JF: Justice as Fairness: A Restatement, edited by Erin Kelly, Harvard University Press, 2001. PP: Lectures on the History of Political Philosophy, edited by Samuel Freeman, Harvard University Press, 2007. v Introduction During the last three decades, John Rawls has been arguably the most famous defender of liberal democracy in philosophy. Compared with previous generations of philosophers, Rawls, perhaps due to more historical experience with democracy behind him and modern philosophical achievements he has absorbed, has lifted our understanding of liberal democracy to a new level. In a time when liberal democracy is expanding its stage to the whole world, Rawls‘s work deserves serious reflection, especially reflection from the perspective of democratic theory. Nevertheless, Rawls‘s major arguments for liberal democracy appear to be highly dependent upon a public political culture already committed to certain liberal and democratic values; Rawls seems to be more concerned with the survival of liberal democracy in already democratized countries than with its creation and expansion in other places. For people from non-liberal and non-democratic cultures, reading Rawls is therefore both exciting and perplexing. For both academic and practical reasons, I set out to find the universal tone in Rawls‘s dialect. I argue that Rawls‘s justification of liberal democracy encourages a political development towards liberalization and democratization, both inside his own society and in other societies. For this purpose, I need to explain why Rawls chooses to speak only from a specific tradition, and why this local preaching can have universal implications.