Abstract

The paper examines a possible ethics for the current scenario, in order to bring human beings closer together and awaken in them a feeling of solidarity. For such an examination, at first, theories such as the utilitarianism reviewed by Rawls are questioned. It searches for a valid criterion for all participants of a certain universalism or for a real and non-exclusive “us”. The call for solidarity is proposed as a way of uniting people, as opposed to selfishness. Then solidarity is defended, according to Richard Rorty. This philosopher affirms the need for an agreement among the members of society, because only then would there be a real “we”. Next, there is the question about how to make people more supportive, but without resorting to the traditional metaphysical perspective on humanity: there is a bet on the existence of shared characteristics that lead to democratic equality, however, respecting the differences of each one. It is still questioned what would lead the richest to sympathize with the poorest, observing the proposals made by Rorty about raising awareness, presenting the risk of poverty to the rich and appealing to the feeling of humanity. Finally, Rortyan egalitarianism is considered, according to which solidarity is beyond rationality. It would be historically constituted and based on the relationship with the other, on the common feeling of vulnerability, crucial to society in times of pandemic.