The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Reconciliation Through the Public Use of Reason: Remarks on John Rawls's Political Liberalism
Abstract
L'A. critique la conception de la justice de J. Rawls qui, fondee sur des principes deontologiques, ne fait pas de distinction entre les questions de justification et les questions d'acceptation, d'une part, et l'autonomie privee et l'autonomie publique, d'autre part. Dans l'article suivant intitule «Reply to Habermas» («The Journal of Philosophy», vol. 42, n°3, mars 1995, pp. 132-180), J. Rawls explique la signification de son liberalisme politique
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Measuring Political Deliberation: A Discourse Quality Index
Steenbergen, M. R., Bächtiger, A., Spörndli, M., & Steiner, J. (2003) · Comparative European Politics · doi:10.1057/palgrave.cep.6110002 · Cited by 719
Justification and Application: The Revival of the Rawls–Habermas Debate
Pedersen, J. (2012) · Philosophy of the Social Sciences · doi:10.1177/0048393111414723 · Cited by 318
Heyward, C. (2008) · Environmental Politics · doi:10.1080/09644010802193591 · Cited by 261
Gender as a Variable in Natural-Language Processing: Ethical Considerations
Larson, B. (2017) · Proceedings of the First ACL Workshop on Ethics in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/w17-1601 · Cited by 111
Whelan, G. (2013) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10551-013-1823-y · Cited by 49
Metadata
- Authors
- Habermas, J., & Journal of Philosophy Inc.
- Venue
- Journal of Philosophy
- Publisher
- Philosophy Documentation Center
- Published
- 1995
- Volume
- 92
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 109-131
- ISSN
- 0022-362X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1472633476
- Cited by
- 521
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 27.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Reconciliation Through the Public Use of Reason: Remarks on John Rawls's Political Liberalism. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5840/jphil199592335
- The paper
- Habermas, J., & Journal of Philosophy Inc. (1995). Reconciliation Through the Public Use of Reason: Remarks on John Rawls's Political Liberalism. Journal of Philosophy. https://doi.org/10.5840/jphil199592335
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
