Write a 4 page essay on 20th Century American Liberalism.Download file to see previous pages... However, these ideas were challenged, asserted or weakened by the modern philosophers such as David Ricc

Write a 4 page essay on 20th Century American Liberalism.

However, these ideas were challenged, asserted or weakened by the modern philosophers such as David Ricci and Will Kymlyika as they introduced new thoughts and beliefs with regards individualism, behaviorism and equality in the field of political philosophy.David Ricci, a leading philosopher in the previous century, argued that many political scientists have produced a plethora of literature only to improve their possibilities of tenure and thus, sacrificed rationality in their search of novelty which can give a scholar quick fame and prove her worth in her field. Ricci also argued in his essay Behavioral Persuasion that the rise of behavioral science brought about the decline of political philosophy (Ricci 150). He also contends that the quantity of work on the field of behavioral science has not produced real breakthroughs and that the behavioral scientists failed to see how systems in politics function. This, according to Ricci, resulted to the field's ethical shortcomings as experts in this area studied pseudo-politics and not real politics nor moral agendas applied to the field of politics....

This clearly means that if there is a conflict between individual and collective rights, individual rights should prevail (Kymlicka 122) .

Although Kymlica's contentions have their precedence in the works of Rawls especially the pairs of moral principles Rawls suggested in his works, their ideas on individualism do not take parallel paths. In Rawls lecture titled Powers of Citizens and Their Representation, Rawls argued that democratic institutions usually lead to pluralism as our differences and diversity, groupings and ethnic variety often results to divergence in opinions (Rawls 47-88). He added that citizens will mostly disagree on their ideas with regards moral and political question but this pluralism is 'reasonable' in modern society. However, Kymlicka clearly argued that in the conflict of individual and 'plural' rights, the rights of an individual should prevail. This does not mean, nevertheless, that Rawls does not advocate respect of an individual opinion. As a matter of fact, Rawls contends that it is unreasonable to unwillingly acknowledge the claims of others (Rawls 51). For Rawls, disparate philosophies are results of freedom and this should be viewed positively as this lead to a diversity of 'comprehensive philosophical and religious doctrines about the nature of the good or ultimate value'. If this difference leads to arguments, Rawls suggest that these altercations should be viewed favorably as it is always difficult to reach a consensus (Rawls 56-57).

On the topic of moral psychology, we will find that Ricci and Rawls have totally disparate assertion.