After reading Bill English's Dec. 2 column, I just want to know if he really believes that in half a page he has written an "obituary" for what he acknowledges is "the most brilliant defense of the liberal state." I've certainly changed a lot of my "freshman political theory"--I hope for the better--but one concept that's stuck with me is an attempt to be academically humble.
If I come up with a half-page argument that refutes a brilliant, influential and commonly accepted theory, then I've probably misunderstood that theory. I'll only offer here that John Rawls has some very good reasons why it's better to build handicap facilities than to chop off people's legs. I'd imagine everyone can think of quite a few relevant distinctions. If English really believes that both options are the same to Rawls, then perhaps he should return to his FOCUS class.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.