– between 1500-2000 words
– Source: com/2014/08/rawls99.pdf”>https://giuseppecapograssi.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/rawls99.pdf
** Please list any additional relevant sources used**
– Rawls, unlike some earlier social contract theorists, acknowledges that it’s impossible for a government to get unanimous actual consent from all of its citizens. But he suggests that a just government can do something close enough to be important: it can act in such a way that its citizens would consent to those actions, under different, entirely hypothetical, conditions. Explain how Rawls argues for the importance of this hypothetical consent. Then evaluate his argument, discussing at least one possible way to object to it.
– Formatting:
Introduction: Just one paragraph, two at the most. Briefly describe your topic, clearly state your central thesis, and say what each section of the paper will do.
Section 1: Explaining what happens in the texts you’re evaluating.
Section 2: Make a strong argument of your own in support of your thesis. (E.g. “The best way for Locke to address the rarity of explicit consent is…”)
Section 3: Objections! Explain at least one way that a reasonable person might think that your argument in support of your thesis (from section 2) doesn’t work. Then explain why the worry you’ve named is not a good one. (Feel free to do this step multiple times—bring up more than one objection, and then show why each one doesn’t succeed.)
0 comments