Abstract

Rawls presents justice as fairness as an attempt to preserve rights-based, liberal institutions while abandoning the Kantian metaphysics, particularly the Kantian view of the self, in terms of which such institutions have traditionally been defended. Many have argued that the collapse of the Kantian view of the self creates serious difficulties for this project, despite Rawls' avowed indifference towards metaphysics. I evaluate this sort of criticism by examining more general questions about the logical relationship between moral theory and the metaphysics of the self. I conclude that Rawls is right to insist that he need not commit himself to a philosophical theory of the self, Kantian or otherwise