Lectures on the History of Political Philosophy

Rawls wrote that his goal was 'to identify the more central features of liberalism as expressing a political conception of justice when liberalism is viewed from within the tradition of democratic constitutionalism' . This framing explains why he groups Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau as contractarians; Hume, Sidgwick, and Mill as utilitarians; and Marx as a critic of liberalism. He is not surveying the history of political thought for its own sake but tracing the strands that constitute the tradition he saw himself as working within. The lectures were constantly revised over three decades, reflecting Rawls's developing views on the history of liberalism and on how his own work related to it .

Freeman, Rawls's former student and teaching assistant, edited the volume from written lectures and notes spanning roughly the mid-1960s to the mid-1990s . The book includes a syllabus from one of Rawls's courses, transcripts of typed handouts, introductory notes from Rawls himself, and Freeman's editorial apparatus . Freeman also included unfinished lectures on Sidgwick and Butler in an appendix, noting they were found in Rawls's papers but not explicitly prepared for publication in this volume . Readers should approach the book as a curated reconstruction of a course, not as a monograph Rawls wrote for publication—he was reluctant to publish the lectures during his lifetime .

Matthew Simpson, reviewing the book in the Journal of the History of Philosophy, called it 'a magnificently odd book' . The oddity lies in a tension: Rawls preaches a contextual approach to interpreting historical texts, yet often explains a thinker's work by comparing it with his own theory of justice as fairness. The Mill chapters are the clearest example—Rawls asks how a utilitarian view leads to the same substantive principles as justice as fairness, a question that presupposes the reader knows Rawls's theory . Simpson concludes that the results are fascinating rather than flawed, but novice readers unfamiliar with Rawls's work may be baffled. The book's value lies in what it reveals about Rawls's self-understanding, not in its neutrality as intellectual history.

Reviewers have been nearly unanimous in identifying the Rousseau lectures as the weakest. Simpson wrote that Rawls's discussion of Rousseau's most radical ideas—particularly the Lawgiver and the General Will—'seems willfully bland,' reducing the Lawgiver to a figure who sets up institutions that 'fashion a general will' without addressing whether psychological manipulation undermines the ideal of freedom . The Mill chapters, by contrast, have been praised for a plausible and deep reconciliation of Mill's utilitarianism with inviolable principles of justice, grounded in Mill's account of human self-understanding in the industrial age . The Hobbes and Locke lectures are generally treated as solid, careful readings that illuminate Rawls's own commitments through contrast.

The two volumes are companion projects, both edited posthumously from Rawls's Harvard course materials. The Moral Philosophy lectures, edited by Barbara Herman and published in 2000, cover figures like Kant, Hegel, and Leibniz; the Political Philosophy lectures, edited by Freeman and published in 2007, focus on Hobbes through Marx . Together they document Rawls's teaching across the two domains that structured his own work. The political lectures are shaped by his interest in the development of social contract theory, liberal utilitarianism, and the socialist critique of liberalism—the three strands he saw as constituting the modern debate . Readers seeking Rawls's engagement with Kant's moral philosophy should turn to the earlier volume; this one presupposes that background.

The book is not designed for beginners, though it can be read profitably with some preparation. Rawls's characteristic prose is patient and clear, but his interpretive framework presupposes familiarity with justice as fairness. The Mill chapters, in particular, ask how Mill's utilitarianism converges with Rawls's principles—a question that requires knowing what those principles are . The lectures do not systematically present Rawls's own theory; he left that out because it was available in his published works . Readers new to Rawls should start with A Theory of Justice or Justice as Fairness: A Restatement before turning to these lectures. Those already familiar with Rawls's work will find the volume indispensable for understanding how he situated himself within the tradition he transformed.