Abstract: Contemporary political philosophers have argued that we need normative theories for non-ideal scenarios — scenarios that involve unfavorable political, historical, social, and/or economic conditions. In this talk, I argue that Plato’s Laws envisages another reason for non-ideal theory: human beings are metaphysically limited. This limitation has political, ethical, and epistemic consequences: human beings cannot live in perfect political organizations or under perfect institutions, they cannot possess perfect virtue, nor can they aspire to a precisely educated city. Nevertheless, humans ought to strive to become better, and they ought to aim for a social order that supports this. For this reason, Plato presents both ideal and non-ideal scenarios, side by side, in order to guide future lawgivers.It is sometimes assumed that virtue ethics—because of its preoccupation with a perfect person—has nothing to say about non-ideal settings. Contrary to this assumption, I argue that Plato’s Laws is a rich resource for non-ideal theory.
LOCATION:Robbins Library, Emerson Hall 211 STATUS:CONFIRMED DTSTART:20240307T200000Z DTEND:20240307T220000Z END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR