Abstract

This essay addresses the question of the problem of method in John Rawls' theory, that is, the justification of this theory of justice as fairness. Three possible answers have been considered: the contract argument, the reflective equilibrium and the constructivism. What has not been considered, however, are their relations to one another. Are they, perhaps, contradictory methodological strategies? Is it possible to talk of a 'circle of demostration', as P. Ricoeur does? This paper outlines an answer to these questions, focussing upon the decisive tole played by the contract argument