{"id":3450,"date":"2026-08-11T22:10:56","date_gmt":"2026-08-11T16:40:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/psir\/notes\/communitarian-critiques-of-rawls\/"},"modified":"2026-08-12T02:58:30","modified_gmt":"2026-08-11T21:28:30","slug":"communitarian-critiques-of-rawls","status":"publish","type":"psir_note","link":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/psir\/notes\/communitarian-critiques-of-rawls\/","title":{"rendered":"Communitarian critiques of Rawls"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n
PSIR Notes<\/a>\u203a<\/span>I-A Political Theory and Indian Politics<\/a>\u203a<\/span>Communitarian critiques of Rawls<\/span><\/div>\n
\n
Paper I \u00b7 Political Theory and Indian Politics<\/div>\n

Communitarian critiques of Rawls<\/h1>\n
Syllabus \u00b7 Paper I-A \u00b7 3<\/b> \u2014 Justice : Conceptions of justice with special reference to Rawl\u2019s theory of justice and its communitarian critiques.<\/div>\n<\/header>\n
\n
<\/p>\n

The Communitarian Critique of Rawls<\/h3>\n

Liberalism vs communitarianism.<\/span> Liberalism: the individual is prior, liberty primary, right prior to good, the common good often the sum of individual goods. Communitarianism: the individual is situated in community, identity shaped by language, history, religion, family and culture, the good prior to right, the common good more than a sum of private interests. Will Kymlicka<\/span>: \u201cCommunitarians believe that the value of community is not sufficiently recognized in liberal theories of justice, or in the public culture of liberal societies.\u201d The core objection: Rawls imagines an isolated, abstract, unencumbered self, whereas real persons are embedded and moral choices cannot be made outside community.<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cTo imagine a person incapable of constitutive attachments\u2026is not to conceive an ideally free and rational agent, but to imagine a person wholly without character.\u201d<\/p>\n

Michael Sandel<\/cite><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Thinker<\/th>\nWork<\/th>\nCore idea<\/th>\nKey line<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
Michael Sandel<\/span><\/td>\nLiberalism and the Limits of Justice (1982)<\/td>\nthe self is constituted by its ends, not prior to them; the state should promote the community\u2019s good, not stay neutral<\/td>\n\u201cthe image of the unencumbered self is flawed\u201d<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Alasdair MacIntyre<\/span><\/td>\nAfter Virtue (1981)<\/td>\nvirtues develop inside traditions; liberal neutrality breeds moral relativism; agency is narrative<\/td>\n\u201cMorality which is no particular society\u2019s morality is to be found nowhere.\u201d<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Charles Taylor<\/span><\/td>\nSources of the Self (1989)<\/td>\nrejects atomism; identity is self-interpreting; selves exist within \u201cwebs of interlocution\u201d<\/td>\n\u201cwe are selves only in that certain issues matter for us\u201d<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Michael Walzer<\/span><\/td>\nSpheres of Justice (1983)<\/td>\ncomplex equality \u2014 each good distributed by its own social meaning; no sphere should dominate another<\/td>\nmoney should not dominate politics; wealth should not buy health, education or power<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n

Michael Walzer<\/span>\u2019s definition: \u201cComplex equality means that no citizen\u2019s standing in one sphere or with regard to one social good can be undercut by his standing in some other sphere, with regard to some other good.\u201d Criticism of Walzer: no reliable method to compare income, wealth, reputation, power, education and health; a strong ethical vision but a weak political mechanism.<\/p>\n

Assessment.<\/span> The critique shows justice cannot ignore culture, that identity is socially formed and the neutral state is not fully neutral. Its limit: community norms may preserve hierarchy, patriarchy, caste or authority, so cultural recognition must still answer liberty and equality. In multicultural societies the debates on religious freedom, personal law, the Uniform Civil Code, the Shah Bano<\/span> case and the Shayara Bano<\/span> case show the tension between universal equality and community identity. Rawls answers in Political Liberalism<\/em> through the political conception, reasonable pluralism and overlapping consensus.<\/p>\n

UPSC 2019 \u00b7 15m<\/span>Examine communitarian perspectives on justice.<\/span>Answer<\/a><\/div>\n
UPSC 2023 \u00b7 15m<\/span>Rawls\u2019 idea of the \u201cliberal self\u201d is too individualistic. Explain the communitarian critique.<\/span>Answer<\/a><\/div>\n

Michael Walzer \u2014 complex equality<\/h3>\n

In Spheres of Justice<\/em> (1983), Michael Walzer<\/span> offers a communitarian<\/span> alternative to universal theories of distributive justice. He rejects any single metric \u2014 welfare, resources or capabilities. Social goods carry different meanings; different goods need different principles; no single principle fits all spheres<\/span>.<\/p>\n

\n

Complex equality<\/span> \u201cNo citizen\u2019s standing in one sphere or with regard to one social good can be undercut by his standing in some other sphere, with regard to some other good.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n