Précis of Philosophizing the Indefensible
-
Shmuel Nili
Abstract
This book asks what distinctive contributions political philosophers might make when reflecting on obvious moral failures in public policy. I defend a particular kind of contribution: I argue that political philosophers can and should craft ‘strategic’ arguments for public policy reforms, showing how morally urgent reforms can be grounded, for the sake of discussion, even in problematic premises associated with their opponents. The book’s opening chapter provides a general defense of this approach, situating it within a broader conception of political philosophy’s social responsibilities. Subsequent chapters then apply strategic theorizing to a set of diverse policy issues. These range from the abortion debate and financial regulation in the United States, through controversies surrounding the participation of Arab parties in Israel’s political process, to global issues, such as commercial ties with oil-rich dictatorships, and the bearing of such ties on global climate change.
© 2024 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Focus: Shmuel Nili, Philosophizing the Indefensible: Strategic Political Theory
- Précis of Philosophizing the Indefensible
- Should we Distinguish Between Repugnant and Non-Repugnant Unreasonable Views?
- Property Rights, Fossil Fuel Imports, and Climate Change
- Civic Friendship, the Burdens of Politics, and the Ethics of Attention
- Philosophizing the Indefensible: Reply to Critics
- General Part
- What Can Historicising Rawls Achieve?
- Can Two Opposing Narratives Be Equally Valid? Reflections on Zreik’s Reflections on the War in Gaza
- Just Independence Wars and the October 7th Massacre
- Past, Present, and Future: A Reply to Heyd and Benbaji
- Proportionality and Necessity in Israel’s Invasion of Gaza, 2023–2024
- Discussion
- Response to My Critics
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Focus: Shmuel Nili, Philosophizing the Indefensible: Strategic Political Theory
- Précis of Philosophizing the Indefensible
- Should we Distinguish Between Repugnant and Non-Repugnant Unreasonable Views?
- Property Rights, Fossil Fuel Imports, and Climate Change
- Civic Friendship, the Burdens of Politics, and the Ethics of Attention
- Philosophizing the Indefensible: Reply to Critics
- General Part
- What Can Historicising Rawls Achieve?
- Can Two Opposing Narratives Be Equally Valid? Reflections on Zreik’s Reflections on the War in Gaza
- Just Independence Wars and the October 7th Massacre
- Past, Present, and Future: A Reply to Heyd and Benbaji
- Proportionality and Necessity in Israel’s Invasion of Gaza, 2023–2024
- Discussion
- Response to My Critics
