This is a very useful book. It consists of 225 short essays, by various authors, on a variety of topics drawn from, or related to, the work of John Rawls. The level of scholarship is high, practically all of the essays are valuable and useful, and many of them are genuinely stimulating and thought-provoking. The editors have aimed to produce a volume that acknowledges the scope for genuine interpretative debate while recognising that “not everything is debateable”. Indeed, they state it as their goal “to enable students and scholars to better distinguish what is debateable from what is not and to bring the latter more fully to bear on the former” (p. xxii). The plan is wisely framed and skilfully executed.
Since the core of Rawls's theory is to be found in some simple and memorable ideas (rational choice from behind a “veil of ignorance”, the “thin theory of the good”, and so forth), many of his more casual readers neglect and underestimate the complexity and refinement of the argument that unpacks and sustains that core. In working out the detail of his position, Rawls develops a complex and carefully constructed apparatus of concepts and these must be mastered by anyone seeking to attain a substantial grasp of the theory. Many of the entries in the book aim to elucidate this elaborate conceptual framework, and perusal of the book should therefore make it easier for a typical reader of Rawls to get to grips with the real substance of his theory. Here we learn of such things as “burdened societies” and “the burdens of judgment”; “chain connection” and “close knitness”; “primary goods” and “public reason”; “outlaw states” and “overlapping consensus”. There are, perhaps, some curious omissions (e.g. why no entry on “the two moral powers”, an idea which is important to Rawls yet which does not even appear in the index to the present volume?) but readers tackling the Rawlsian labyrinth with serious intent will find this aspect of the book invaluable.
Other entries concern more general topics of political philosophy and reflect on Rawls's view of those topics: what is the position of Rawls on “animals” or “the environment”, for example? What is the relationship between Rawls and “democracy”, the “economy”, and “civic republicanism”? How does the Rawlsian theory of justice relate to that offered by “luck egalitarianism”?
A third category of entry concerns those contemporaries of Rawls, within political philosophy and welfare economics, whose views have a significant bearing upon Rawls's theory. Here we find discussions of the bearing upon Rawls's theory of the work of Kenneth Arrow, Brian Barry, Gerry Cohen, Ronald Dworkin, John Harsanyi, Martha Nussbaum, Thomas Pogge, Amartya Sen, and many others. Finally are entries on figures from the past whose work has influenced Rawls, or bears an interesting relationship to that of Rawls, including obvious figures such as J.S. Mill and Henry Sidgwick, and somewhat less obvious ones such as Aquinas and Leibniz. Rawls's rich and deep understanding of the history of moral and political philosophy (revealed by his posthumously published lectures) makes these short essays particularly interesting and appropriate.
Although Rawls always wrote in a clear and accessible style, his work nevertheless presents his readers with a daunting challenge. In part, the difficulty springs from the sheer bulk and complexity of his writings, but the difficulty is greatly increased by the fact that his work evolved over a long period of time, and the relationship between earlier and later versions of the theory is not always transparent. For example, some readers view his 1993 book Political Liberalism as a fundamental departure from his 1971 work A Theory of Justice, while others see considerable continuity. His many published essays and his posthumously published lectures on the history of moral and political philosophy add to the overall complexity of the picture. Although, in his 2001 book Justice as Fairness, Rawls offered us an integrated statement of his mature position, it remains the case that, for a full picture of his thinking on many issues, one must consult a great diversity of sources and then puzzle over the relationships obtaining between them. Many of the essays in the Cambridge Rawls Lexicon help the student carefully to piece together relevant observations from across the full range of Rawls's work, and offer thoughtful reflections on the internal coherence of the positions expressed. Readers of the volume cannot fail to deepen their understanding in consequence.
Like J.S. Mill, Rawls possessed considerable expertise in fields with which philosophers are not always completely comfortable: in Rawls's case, the most relevant fields being welfare economics, decision theory, and game theory. Readers coming to his work from a background in law, for example, are likely to encounter difficulties with these aspects of his work. Here again, the present volume is very helpful, offering ready assistance and lucid clarifications.
But, principally, the volume is a smorgasbord of interesting and thought-provoking miniature essays which invite the reader to sample and enjoy. The sumptuous production and high price of this volume both suggest that Cambridge University Press see it as principally a reference work for purchase by libraries. This is very regrettable, since (price permitting) it would surely have found a place on many desks and broadened the understanding of many students of Rawls's work. Could a less costly format not have been adopted?
