In Defence of Pure Pluralism: Two Readings of Walzer's Spheres of Justice

In this article I will argue that there are two theories of distributive justice hidden in Walzer's Spheres of Justice . The first one emphasises the separation of distributive spheres. It tries to formulate distributive criteria by sticking faithfully to sphere-specificity. I shall refer to this theory as 'pure pluralism'. The second theory downplays the separation of spheres and emphasises 'across spheres' or 'between spheres' criteria instead. I shall call this theory 'mitigated pluralism'. Mitigated pluralism has become popular among Walzer's friendly critics who apparently do not want to charge him with a distributive theory as clear and rigid as pure pluralism. Although I consider myself another friendly critic, I shall argue in favour of pure pluralism.