 one is deprived of the experience of fulfilling one's ends through the activities that one spends much of one's life doing. Indeed, I suspect that in claiming that social arrangements should encourage citizens to value their conceptions of the good what Rawls has in mind is that those arrangements should encourage, or at least allow, citizens to regard the activities that make up their contributions to society as among their ends. So, let us suppose that Rawls's concern about citizens' self-respect is the concern that citizens believe that the activities that make up their contribution to a scheme of social cooperation are in some sense valuable. There are three ways that we might understand the attitude of valuing that one might have toward one's contribution.7 A person might see his contribution as valuable 6 I realize that this interpretation represents a significant departure from Rawls's stated view and that this interpretation-or perhaps, more accurately, modification-ultimately requires more argument than I have provided. I think this modification can be supported by the link, suggested in Rawls's work, between self-respect and the ideal of reciprocity that Rawls claims is expressed by his principles of justice. He says, for instance, that while the least advantaged in society "control fewer resources, they are doing their full share on terms recognized by all as mutually advantageous and consistent with everyone's self-respect" (2001: 139). Thanks to Jeffrey Moriarty for pointing out to me this passage. 7 Larry Thomas has interpreted this valuing stance as seeing oneself as having worth for her success in the pursuit of her conception of the good. I do not think that interpretation is supported very well by Rawls's writings, though there are some grounds for thinking that this notion is what Rawls has in mind in his description of the self-confidence aspect of self-respect. See Thomas 1978a and 1978b. OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 2/11/2012, SPi 242 Cynthia A. Stark (1) in the sense of being "meritorious,"8 or (2) in the sense of thinking it is good for him to undertake it, or (3) in the sense of judging that it matters. We can get a grasp on these different attitudes of valuing by appealing again to our example of Marty. Let us suppose now, for the sake of simplicity, that Marty does not value cooking as an end; it is not part of his conception of the good. (Let us say that his conception of the good revolves
one is deprived of the experience of fulfilling one's ends through the activities that one spend much of one's biography doing. Indeed, I suspect that in claiming that social arrangement should encourage citizens to rate their invention of the good what Rawls has in judgment is that those arrangements should encourage, or at least admit, citizens to regard the activeness that produce up their contributions to society as among their ends. thus, let us suppose that Rawls's concern about citizen' self - respect is the concern that citizen believe that the activeness that make up their contribution to a outline of social cooperation are in some sense valuable. There are three ways that we might sympathize the attitude of valuing that one might have toward one's contribution.7 A person might see his contribution as valuable 6 I realize that this interpretation constitute a significant departure from Rawls's stated view and that this interpretation - or perhaps, more accurately, modification - ultimately requires more argument than I have provided. I remember this modification can be supported by the radio link, suggest in Rawls's work, between self - respect and the ideal of reciprocity that Rawls claim is express by his principles of justice. He say, for instance, that while the least advantaged in society " control fewer resources, they are do their full share on terms recognized by all as mutually advantageous and consistent with everyone's self - respect " (2001: 139). Thanks to Jeffrey Moriarty for sharpen out to me this passage. 7 Larry Thomas has interpreted this valuing stance as seeing oneself as have worth for her success in the pursuit of her invention of the good. I do not think that interpretation is supported very well by Rawls's writing, though there are some flat coat for thinking that this notion is what Rawls have in mind in his description of the self - confidence aspect of self - deference. See Thomas 1978a and 1978b. OUP correct PROOF – FINAL, 2/11/2012, SPi 242 Cynthia A. Stark (1) in the sense of being " meritorious,"8 or (2) in the sense of thinking it is good for him to undertake it, or (3) in the common sense of judging that it matters. We can get a compass on these different attitudes of valuing by appealing again to our example of Marty. permit us suppose now, for the sake of chasteness, that Marty does not value cooking as an end; it is not share of his conception of the good. (Let us suppose that his conception of the good revolves
 onf is deprived of the exptrience of fulfilling onx's ends through the activities that one speids nuch if one's life doing. Indded, I susiect that in rlaiming that sorjal arrangemehbs shmnld encourage cltizens to ealue their cotcdpcions of the good what Rawls has in iind is tjat those arraggemtntf shkllb encourage, or at least allow, cjtizens to regard thr activities that make up hheig contributions to society as amogt their ends. So, let us suppose thaj Rawls's concern about citizens' relf-rzspect is tye cojwern that cmtizenf believe that the awtivitirs that make ui themr cintribution to a scheke of social coopetation are iu some sense valuable. Tyere dre dhred wahs uhav ws mighh uiderstand tge attitude of valuing that ont mytht have towadd one'f sontribution.7 A person might see his conuribufion as valuable 6 I reaoize that this interptetation rqpresents a significant departure from Rawls's staded vmed aue thag tjis interpretation-or perhaps, more accurately, ikdofpcation-ultimately requires mprf stgument than I have 'dobided. I think this modifisatiob can be fuppprted by the link, suggested in Rawls's wjek, between self-res'ect and the idesl of reciprocity that Rawls clajms is exprfssed by gks principles of juxthce. He says, for instance, trat while the least xdvamtaged in societj "conbsol fewer resourced, thei are going theig full share on terms recognizev by all as motudllj advantayeous snd consistene with everyong's self-refpect" (2001: 139). Thanks no Jeffreb Moriarty fjr pointing ogj to me this 'assage. 7 Jarrt Thimas har interpreted tnis valuiuy stance qs seeing oneself es hxbing worth for ktr wuccess in the lurruie lf hqs conception of ghe bood. K do nou tminy thst interpretation is suplorted very well bu Vawls's wrutings, trough there ate some grounds fog thiiking vhat tnis notion is what Rawls has in mjnd in hid dcscription of the self-confideuce aspect of self-respect. See Thomas 1978a aid 1978b. OUP CORRECTED PROOD – FINAL, 2/11/2012, SPi 242 Cyntkis A. Stark (1) mn the sense of being "meritorious,"8 oe (2) in the sense on thinking it is good ror hik to kndertake it, or (3) in the sense of judging that it matters. We can get a grawp on vhqse differeht aytitugef of vajuinj uy appealing agaim to our example of Marty. Let ur supposa uow, for the sake of simplicitu, ghat Marty dogs not value cooking as an end; it os not part of his conception og the good. (Let us say thst his cincepfion of thx good revolves
one is deprived of the experience of ends the activities one spends much I that in claiming social arrangements should citizens to value their conceptions of good what Rawls has in mind is that those arrangements should encourage, or least allow, citizens to regard the activities that make up their contributions to as their So, us suppose that Rawls's concern about citizens' self-respect is the concern that citizens believe that the that make up their contribution to a scheme social cooperation are in sense valuable. There are three that might understand attitude valuing one might have one's contribution.7 A person might see his contribution as valuable 6 I realize that this interpretation represents significant departure stated view that interpretation-or more accurately, modification-ultimately argument than I have provided. I can be supported by the link, suggested in work, between and the ideal of reciprocity that claims is expressed by his principles of justice. says, for instance, that while the least advantaged in society "control fewer resources, they are full share on terms by all as advantageous consistent everyone's (2001: 139). to Jeffrey Moriarty for pointing out to me this passage. 7 Thomas has interpreted this valuing stance as seeing oneself as for success in the of her conception of good. do not think that supported well though are grounds for thinking that notion is what Rawls has mind in his description self-respect. See Thomas 1978a and 1978b. OUP CORRECTED – FINAL, 2/11/2012, SPi 242 Cynthia A. (1) in the sense of being "meritorious,"8 or (2) in the sense thinking it for him to undertake it, or (3) in sense of judging that matters. We can get a grasp on these different of by appealing to our example Marty. Let us now, for the simplicity, that does value end; it is not part of conception the good. (Let us say his the good revolves
 one is deprived of the experieNce of fulfiLling One'S enDs ThroUgh tHe activities thAT one Spends much of one's life doIng. InDeED, I suSPeCt thaT in claiMInG THat SoCiAl aRrANgEmentS shOuld encOurage citiZenS tO value their cONcEptions of tHe gOod what Rawls Has In mind Is ThaT Those ArrAngemEnts shOUld encOurage, or aT lEAst allOW, citizeNS To RegaRd the activities thAT mAKe up their contrIbutioNs TO sOCIetY as Among their EnDs. So, lET us suppOSe THAT RaWLs's concern aboUt citizens' sELf-rEspect Is The COncern That cItIZenS believe thaT the ActivitieS that mAKe up theIR contriBution To a SchEme oF SoCiAl cOoPEraTIoN arE In sOme sense VaLuAble. THere ARE THree WayS thaT we miGht understand The AttiTUde Of valUing tHat oNe Might Have toWard oNe'S contribution.7 A pErsoN might see His CoNtrIbUtion AS valuaBle 6 i reAlize thAt this iNTerPrETATiOn represents a signiFiCANt DeparturE from RAWlS's STated vieW aNd tHat tHIS inteRpreTAtIon-or perHaps, moRE aCcUrately, MoDificaTiOn-uLtiMatelY RequIres moRe argumeNt thaN i have provided. I THink this modifICaTIOn CAn be SupPorted by the Link, SUggeSted IN RAwlS'S work, BetweEn SElF-Respect and the ideal oF rEciproCity tHat Rawls claimS is expressED BY his prinCiplES oF Justice. He says, fOr insTance, that wHIle the leAst adVantaged In society "CONtrol fewEr rEsoUrcEs, tHEY aRe doing their fULL shaRe On terms RecOgnized By aLl aS muTuaLlY advantagEous and cOnSiStEnT wiTh eveRYone's selF-rEspEcT" (2001: 139). ThAnks tO jeffreY MoriArty FoR pOIntIng out tO Me THIs paSsAgE. 7 LarRy THoMas haS intERprEted thiS valuing sTanCE as sEeInG oneselF as having wortH fOr her succeSs In tHe pursUIT of her coNception of the good. I do not THink thaT inTerprEtatIon is suppOrtEd very WelL By RawlS's writIngs, tHoUgh THEre arE SOmE grOuNds for thinKINg tHat thIs NotiOn is whaT Rawls has in mind in hIS deScription of thE seLf-coNFIdEncE AsPEct Of SElf-RESpect. See Thomas 1978a And 1978b. OUP CORrEctEd PROOF – FINAl, 2/11/2012, sPi 242 cyNthia A. STark (1) in tHe senSE of beinG "meritoriOus,"8 or (2) in thE sEnse OF ThiNking it is gOod for hiM to undertAKe it, oR (3) In The seNse Of judgInG thAt it mAtters. wE caN get a Grasp oN tHese diFfereNt AttitudeS of valuing by appealing agAin to oUr exaMplE of Marty. LEt uS SupPose now, foR the Sake of simpLicIty, That MArtY Does nOt vaLUe CooKIng as An enD; It is not paRT oF hiS COnCeption of thE GOOd. (LEt us sAy tHAt his cOncePtion of the good revOLves
 one is deprived of the ex perience o f ful fil lin gone' s en ds through the acti vities that one spends  much  o f  one ' slifedoing.I nd e e d,Isu spe ct th at in  cl aimingthat socia l a rr angements sh o ul d encourag e c itizens to v alu e thei rcon c eptio nsof th e good what R awls hasin mind i s  that t h o se  arr angements shoulde nc o urage, or at l east a ll o w, c iti zen s to regar dthe a c tivitie s  t h a t  ma k e up their co ntributions tosociet yasa mong t heiren d s.So, let ussupp ose thatRawls' s  concer n  aboutcitize ns'  se lf-r e sp ec t i st hec on cer n  th at citiz en sbelie ve t h a t theact ivit ies t hat make up t hei r co n tri butio n toa sc he me of  socia l coo pe ration are in s omesense val uab le . T he re ar e  three  wa ysthat we  mightu nde rs t a n dthe attitude of va lu i n gthat one  might ha ve toward o ne 'scont r i butio n.7A  p erson mi ght se e  h is  contri bu tion a sval uab le 6I  rea lize t hat this  inte r pretation repr e sents a signi f ic a n td epar tur e from Rawl s'ss tate d vi e wand thatthisin t er p retation-or perhaps ,more a ccura tely, modific ation-ulti m a t ely requ ires mo r e argument tha n I h ave provid e d. I thi nk th is modif ication c a n  be supp ort edbythe l in k, suggestedi n  Raw ls 's work , b etweensel f-r esp ect  a nd the id eal of r ec ip ro ci tythatR awls cla im s i sexp resse d  by hi s pri ncip le so f j ustice. He s ays,  f or  ins tan ce , tha t wh i lethe lea st advant age d  inso ci ety "co ntrol fewer r es ources, th ey  ar e doin g their fu ll share on terms recog n ized by  al l asmutu ally adva nta geousand consis tent w ith e ve ryo n e 's se l f -r esp ec t" (2001:1 3 9).  Than ks  toJeffrey  Moriarty for poin t ing  out to me th ispass a g e.  7L ar r y T ho m ash a s interpreted t his valuin gs ta nce as see i ngon eself a s havin g wor t h for h er succes s in thepu rsui t ofher concep tion ofthe good. I don ot  thin k t hat in te rpr etati on iss upp orted  verywe ll byRawls 's  writing s, though there are som e grou nds f orthinkingtha t  th is notion  iswhat Rawls  ha s i n min d i n  hisdesc r ip tio n  of t he s e lf-confid e nc e a s p ec t of self-r e s p ect . See  Th o mas 19 78aand 1978b. OUP CO R RECTED PROOF –  FIN A L , 2 /11 / 2012 ,SPi 242 Cynthi a A .S t ark (1)in  the senseof being  " m erito rious, "8 or(2) int h es ense o f th ink ing it is  go od for him  t ou nderta ke i t,  or (3 ) in t h e se n s e of judging tha t itm a tters .  We  cange t a gra s p on  these dif ferent atti tudesof v aluin g by ap pe alingaga in  to our ex a mple of M arty.  Let us  s uppo senow, f or t h e  sake  ofsi mpl icity, th a t  M a rt yd oes  not  valu ecook ing as an end; itisn ot part  o f h i s  conce p ti o n  of the go od.  (Let u s say that hisc on c eptio n of t he goo d revol v es
 one_is deprived_of the experience of_fulfilling one's_ends_through the_activities_that one spends_much of one's_life doing. Indeed, I_suspect that in_claiming_that social arrangements should encourage citizens to value their conceptions of the good what_Rawls_has in_mind_is_that those arrangements should encourage,_or at least allow, citizens_to regard_the activities that make up their contributions to_society_as among their_ends. So, let us suppose that Rawls's concern about_citizens' self-respect is the concern that_citizens believe that_the_activities_that make up their_contribution to a scheme of social_cooperation are in some sense valuable._There are three ways that we might_understand the attitude of valuing that_one might have toward one's_contribution.7 A_person might see his contribution_as valuable 6_I realize_that this interpretation_represents a significant departure from Rawls's_stated view and_that this interpretation-or perhaps, more accurately,_modification-ultimately_requires more argument_than_I_have provided._I think this_modification_can be_supported_by the link, suggested in Rawls's_work,_between self-respect and the ideal of reciprocity_that Rawls claims is_expressed_by his principles of_justice. He says, for instance,_that while the least advantaged in_society "control_fewer resources,_they are doing their full share on terms recognized by all_as mutually advantageous and consistent with_everyone's self-respect" (2001: 139)._Thanks to_Jeffrey_Moriarty for pointing_out_to me_this passage. 7 Larry Thomas has interpreted_this valuing_stance as seeing oneself as having_worth for her success_in_the pursuit of her conception of_the good. I do not think_that interpretation is supported very_well_by_Rawls's writings, though there are_some grounds for thinking that this_notion is what_Rawls has in mind in his description_of_the self-confidence aspect of self-respect. See_Thomas_1978a and 1978b. OUP CORRECTED PROOF_–_FINAL,_2/11/2012, SPi 242 Cynthia A._Stark (1) in the sense of_being "meritorious,"8 or (2) in the sense of thinking_it is good_for him to undertake it,_or_(3)_in the sense of judging that it matters. We can_get a_grasp on these_different attitudes of valuing by appealing again to our example_of Marty. Let us suppose now, for_the sake of simplicity, that Marty does not value cooking as_an end; it is not part of his_conception of the good. (Let us say_that his conception of_the_good revolves