The Unfeasibly Narrow Rawlsian Interpretation of Fraternity

in Theoria
Joan Vergés-Gifra Girona University

Search for other papers by Joan Vergés-Gifra in
Current site
Google Scholar
Restricted access


In a famous passage in A Theory of Justice, Rawls had an interesting view on fraternity. However, he did not develop it further. The first aim of this article is to show that there are at least two possible interpretations of what Rawls wrote about fraternity: the narrow interpretation and the wide interpretation. We will focus on the narrow interpretation and attract attention to the kinds of problems it presents. In the last section we will assert that there are different ways of conceptualising the ideal of fraternity and that Rawls’s general approach to the issue was just one of them and maybe not the most attractive one.

Contributor Notes

Joan Vergés Gifra is Professor of Political Philosophy in the Department of Philosophy at Girona University in Spain. He has previously been a Consultant Professor at the UOC (Open University of Catalonia, Humanities), Adjunct Professor at the UAB (Autonomous University of Barcelona, Humanities) and Visiting Professor at the UPF (Pompeu Fabra University, Barcelona, Political Sciences).

  • Collapse
  • Expand


A Journal of Social and Political Theory

  • Aristotle. 1980. The Nicomachean Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Cohen, G. A. 2000. If You’re an Egalitarian, How Come You’re So Rich? Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

  • Cohen, G. A. 2008. Rescuing Justice and Equality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

  • Cohen, G. A. 2009. Why Not Socialism. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

  • De Lucas, J. 1993. El concepto de solidaridad. México: Distribuciones Fontamara.

  • Domènech, A. 2003. El eclipse de la fraternidad. Barcelona: Crítica.

  • Frankfurt, H. 1987. ‘Equality as a Moral Ideal’, Ethics, 98(1): 2143.

  • Freeman, S. 2007. Rawls. London: Routledge.

  • Inkova, O. (ed.). 2006. Justice, Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité. Geneva: Institut Européen de l’Université de Genève.

  • Kolers, A. H. 2012. ‘Dynamics of Solidarity’, The Journal of Political Philosophy 20(4): 365383.

  • Lefevre, H. 1972. Le droit à la ville. Paris: Anthropos.

  • Lefevre, H. 2000. La production de l’espace. Paris: Anthropos.

  • McWilliams, W. C. 1973. The Idea of Fraternity in America. Los Angeles: University of California Press.

  • Munoz-Darde, V. 1999. ‘Fraternity and Justice’, in K. Bayertz (ed.), Solidarity. Netherlands: Springer, 8197.

  • Parfit, D. 1997. ‘Equality and Priority’, Ratio 10(3): 202221.

  • Pettit, P. 1997. Republicanism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Rawls, J. 1999. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.

  • Rawls, J. 2001. Justice as Fairness: A Restatement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

  • Reinman, J. 2014. As Free and Just as Possible: The Theory of Marxian Liberalism. Chichester: Wiley Blackwell.

  • Rippe, K. P. 1998. ‘Diminishing Solidarity’, Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 1(3): 355374.

  • Rorty, R. 1989. Contingency, Irony and Solidarity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Rorty, R. 2000. El pragmatismo, una versión. Barcelona: Ariel.

  • Shelby, T. 2005. We Who Are Dark: The Philosophical Foundations of Black Solidarity. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.

  • Taylor, A. E. 2014. ‘Solidarity: Obligations and Expressions’, The Journal of Political Philosophy, 23(2): 128145.

  • Van Parijs, P. 1995. Sauver la solidarité. Paris: Les Éditions du Cerf.

  • Van Parijs, P. 2003. ‘Difference Principles’, in S. Freeman (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Rawls. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 200240.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Van Parijs, P. 2011. Just Democracy: The Rawls–Machiavelli Programme. Colchester: ECPR Press.

  • Walzer, M. 2006. Thick and Thin: Moral Thinking at Home and Abroad. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.

  • Wolff, J. 2001. ‘Levelling Down’, in K. Dowding, J. Hughes and H. Margetts (eds), Challenges to Democracy: The PSA Yearbook 2000. London: Macmillan, 1832.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation


All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 731 589 17
Full Text Views 11 5 2
PDF Downloads 11 4 0