Ben Laurence

Ben Laurence is Assistant Professor in the Department of Philosophy and the College (beginning Autumn 2011). He received his Ph.D. from the University of PIttsburgh in 2008, and his B.A. from Reed College in 1998. His areas of specialization include political philosophy and the history of moral and political philosophy. He has strong interests in the philosophy of race, the philosophy of action, and human rights. 

Laurence's research explores the sense in which political philosophy is practical, and defends the relevance of realistic utopia as an orienting goal for our political practice. He is also working on Kant's political philosophy, and exploring the relevance to democratic theory of empirical literature suggesting that our legislative process is responsive only to the preferences of wealthy citizens.   




Ben Laurence discusses collective action on "Elucidations", the Dept. of Philosophy podcast series - click here


office: Rosenwald 218-B
office hours: Autumn Quarter, Monday 3:00-4:00pm and Thursday, 2:00-3:00 pm
office phone: 773/702-8458


In the News

"In the Engine Room of Reality: Philosophy’s junior faculty members discuss their work, inspiration, and teaching" by Courtney C. W. Guerra, AB’05 Tableau, Spring 2012 - Link

Selected Works

  • “Constructivism, Strict Compliance, and Realistic Utopia” PDF
  • “The Priority of Ideal Theory” PDF
  • “Juridical Laws as Moral Laws in Kant’s Doctrine of Right” in Practical Normativity: Essays on Reasons and Intentions in Law and Practical Reason, edited by Veronica Rodriguez Blanco and George Pavlakos (Cambridge University Press, 2014). PDF
  • “An Anscombean Approach to Collective Action” in Anscombe’s Intention, edited by Anton Ford, Jennifer Hornsby, and Frederick Stoutland (Harvard University Press, 2010). PDF

Recent & Upcoming Courses

PHIL 21700/31600. Human Rights I: Philosophical Foundation. (=HMRT 20100/30100, HIST 29301/39301, LLSO 25100, INRE 31600, LAWS 41200, MAPH 40000) Human rights are claims of justice that hold merely in virtue of our shared humanity. In this course we will explore philosophical theories of this elementary and crucial form of justice. Among topics to be considered are the role that dignity and humanity play in grounding such rights, their relation to political and economic institutions, and the distinction between duties of justice and claims of charity or humanitarian aid. Finally we will consider the application of such theories to concrete, problematic and pressing problems, such as global poverty, torture and genocide. (A) (I). Spring 2015. Syllabus

PHIL 51420. Utopianism. In this class, we will explore the idea that political philosophy is practical. We will address questions such as the following. What is the best interpretation of this idea? How might we defend it against skepticism? What consequences does it have for method? What is it for a political philosophy to be utopian? Is there a good and a bad way of being utopian? How are these to be distinguished? What is it for a political philosophy to be cynical? Does “human nature” place constraints on our political theorizing? What ought we to mean by “human nature” in this context? How do concepts like scarcity and abundance relate to utopian enterprise? (I) Spring 2015. Syllabus

PHIL 21600. Introduction to Political Philosophy. (=GNDR 21601, PLSC 22600) In this class we will investigate what it is for a society to be just. In what sense are the members of a just society equal? What freedoms does a just society protect? Must a just society be a democracy? What economic arrangements are compatible with justice? In the second portion of the class we will consider one pressing injustice in our society in light of our previous philosophical conclusions. Possible candidates include, but are not limited to, racial inequality, economic inequality, and gender hierarchy. Here our goal will be to combine our philosophical theories with empirical evidence in order to identify, diagnose, and effectively respond to actual injustice. (A) Winter 2015. Syllabus

41150. Political Liberalism. Political Liberalism is the view that the principles of justice must be acceptable to reasonable citizens who disagree with one another on basic questions of morality and religion. In this course we will explore whether a commitment to Political Liberalism is compatible with a commitment to ideal theory, the aspiration to provide an account of the ideal political community. On the face of it there seems to be a tension, for the widespread acceptance of false practical doctrines seems pretty squarely non-ideal. On the other hand, defenders of Political Liberalism have argued that the persistence of practical error is inevitable given a commitment to a free society, and surely, we might think, the ideal political community is free. Can and should this circle be squared? And if not, what are we to say about the freedom of an ideal society? Authors to be read include especially John Rawls, but also Martha Nussbaum, Joshua Cohen, Joseph Raz, David Estlund and others. (I) Spring 2012. Syllabus

21580/31580. Libertarianism. Is capitalism justified on the grounds of natural liberty? Is the legitimate exercise of political power limited by our pre-political rights, especially our property rights? Indeed, is the sole function of a just government to safeguard such rights? We will work towards answers to these questions by evaluating the tradition in political philosophy that has tended to answer them in the affirmative—Libertarianism. We will begin with John Locke, the father of this tradition, devoting several weeks to a close reading of his Second Treatise of Government. We will attend to both his method and his substantive political conclusions. We will consider his distinctive use of a social contract thought experiment involving a moralized conception of practical reason, as well as his defense of private property and limited government. We will then consider the works of contemporary Libertarians such as Robert Nozick and Michael Otsuka who take inspiration from Locke’s method but diverge sharply from one another in their political conclusions. Finally, we will consider contemporary critics of the entire tradition, such as G.A. Cohen, and consider the merits of alternative approaches within the social contract tradition. (A) (I) Winter 2012. Syllabus