The recent prominence of the ideal/non-ideal debate is largely due to the fact that it offers a vocabulary in which to diagnose what many see as a key problem of political theory: its relative unwillingness to provide solutions to urgent problems facing people here and now; or for people as they are rather than as they should be. The primary aim of this article is to offer an improved understanding of the territory that the ideal/non-ideal debate relates to.
ArrowK. J.FisherA. C. (1974) ‘Environmental Preservation, Uncertainty, and Irreversibility’, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 88 (2), 312–9.
2.
ArrowK. J.LindR. C. (1970) ‘Uncertainty and the Evaluation of Public Investment Decisions’, The American Economic Review, 60 (3), 364–78.
3.
BrennanG.PettitP. (2005) ‘The Feasibility Issue’, in JacksonF.SmithM. (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Contemporary Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 258–79.
CohenG. A. (2003) ‘Facts and Principles’, Philosophy & Public Affairs, 31 (3), 211–45.
6.
CohenG. A. (2008) Rescuing Justice and Equality. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
7.
CowenT. (2007) ‘The Importance of Defining the Feasible Set’, Economics and Philosophy, 23 (1), 1–14.
8.
EstlundD. (2008) Democratic Authority: A Philosophical Framework. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.
9.
EstlundD. (2010) ‘Human Nature and the Limits (if Any) of Political Philosophy’. Paper presented at Canadian Political Science Association, Montreal, 3 June.
10.
EstlundD. (2011) ‘The Best and the Rest: Optimizing and Comparing in Theories of Justice’, unpublished manuscript.
11.
FarrellyC. (2007) ‘Justice in Ideal Theory: A Refutation’, Political Studies, 55 (4), 844–64.
12.
GalstonW. A. (2010) ‘Realism in Political Theory’, European Journal of Political Theory, 9 (4), 385–411.
13.
MasonA. (2004) ‘Just Constraints’, British Journal of Political Science, 34 (2), 251–68.
14.
MillerD. (2008) ‘Political Philosophy for Earthlings’, in LoeopoldD.StearsM. (eds), Political Theory: Methods and Approaches. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 29–48.
15.
MillsC. W. (2005) ‘“Ideal Theory” as Ideology’, Hypatia, 20, 165–84.
16.
MurphyL. B. (1998) ‘Institutions and the Demands of Justice’, Philosophy & Public Affairs, 27 (4), 251–91.
17.
O'NeillO. (1988) ‘Abstraction, Idealization and Ideology in Ethics’, in EvansJ. D. G. (ed.), Moral Philosophy and Contemporary Problems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 55–69.
18.
O'NeillO. (1996) Towards Justice and Virtue. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
19.
PhillipsM. (1985) ‘Reflections on the Transition from Ideal to Non-ideal Theory’, Noûs, 19, 551–70.
20.
PhilpM. (2010) ‘What is to be Done? Political Theory and Political Realism’, European Journal of Political Theory, 9 (4), 466–84.
21.
RawlsJ. (1999) A Theory of Justice, revised edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
22.
RobeynsI. (2008) ‘Ideal Theory in Theory and Practice’, Social Theory and Practice, 34 (3), 341–62.
23.
SenA. K. (2006) ‘What Do We Want from a Theory of Justice?’, The Journal of Philosophy, 103 (5), 215–38.
24.
SenA. K. (2009) The Idea of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.
25.
SimmonsA. J. (2010) ‘Ideal and Non-ideal Theory’, Philosophy & Public Affairs, 38 (1), 5–36.
26.
StemplowskaZ. (2008) ‘What's Ideal about Ideal Theory?’, Social Theory and Practice, 34 (3), 319–40.
27.
StemplowskaZ.SwiftA. (forthcoming [2012]) ‘Ideal and Nonideal Theory’, in EstlundD. (ed.), The Oxford Handbook to Political Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
28.
SwiftA. (2008) ‘The Value of Philosophy in Nonideal Circumstances’, Social Theory and Practice, 34 (3), 363–87.
29.
ValentiniL. (2009) ‘On the Apparent Paradox of Ideal Theory’, The Journal of Political Philosophy, 17 (3), 332–55.
30.
WolffJ. (2007) ‘Harm and Hypocrisy: Have We Got it Wrong on Drugs?’, Public Policy Research, 14 (2), 126–35.
31.
YpiL. (2011) Global Justice and Avant-Garde Political Agency. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
