In political philosophy, perfectionism is the view that it is the job of the state to best enable its citizens to live good or flourishing lives. It claims that certain lives can be judged to be sound, and thus instructs governments to promote those lives using state institutions etc. Anti-perfectionism denies this. It says that it is not the job of the state to promote good lives. Instead it should restrict itself to securing basic rights and duties, a threshold level of resources and so on. Citizens should be left to adopt pursuits however they see fit. For some anti-perfectionists, this is precisely because we cannot judge any putative life to be sound. However, many are not sceptics, and justify state neutrality for other reasons. All accounts of anti-perfectionism must overcome what has been called the asymmetry objection: what justifies the imbalance inherent in anti-perfectionism? Why believe that the state is permitted to act on judgements about justice, but not on judgements about flourishing? My thesis argues that attempts to respond to the asymmetry objection have failed thus far. Further, I offer an account of political morality that can overcome the problem. The first four chapters of the thesis clarify the debate between perfectionists and anti-perfectionists, narrowing the former down into its most plausible form. Chapters five and six focus on two failed attempts to vindicate anti-perfectionism – Brian Barry's argument from scepticism and Jonathan Quong's Rawlsian approach. In the final chapter I put forward a much more promising argument in favour of anti-perfectionism – justice as a set of constraints.

This Sierra Leone Conflict arose from the society’s failure to institutionalize the requisite post-conventional organizing principle for collective will formation and for conflict resolution. In this post-traditional society - one artificially constructed from diverse political and cultural groups, without a shared ethos – only mutual (communicative) understanding can resolve differences and ensure solidarity. A lack of mutual understanding overburdens the adaptive capacity of the society, creating crises tendencies. Repression only intensified these tendencies, ensuring their eventual catastrophic explosion, 11 years civil conflict. State hindrances to social (communicative) interaction rendered the society incapable of realizing the requisite post conventional moral learning i.e. the social intelligence or problem-solving equipment required to resolve conflict, decolonize itself, neutralize normative power, shed dogmatic consciousness, change oppressive conventions, and influential customs. Thus, the study promotes civic virtues of post conventional morality (justice, truthfulness, moral rightness) as the key for liberating the society from its crisis-inducing colonial organizing principle. As the basis of sociology, the discipline the remains focused on society-wide problems, the theory of social evolution is adopted here to reconstruct the crisis in Sierra Leone’s constitutional democratic development. The study uses the rational reconstructive method to explicate problematic validity claims of norms, policy decisions, or the social order. The social order was rendered crisis-ridden because the reasons - the axis around which mutual understanding revolve - adduced for it cannot admit of consensus. The emerging social disintegration exemplifies use of deficient logic in social interaction, one below the requisite categorical moral cognitive consciousness. For this research, colonization is not necessarily externally induced, but forms of understanding in the political, legal, social, and educational interactions. The key point of the study is this: today Sierra Leone achieves solidarity, and decolonize from its conventional organizing principle, only if the state, economy, and civil society can find their limit in the socio-cultural domain.

This Sierra Leone Conflict arose from the society’s failure to institutionalize the requisite post-conventional organizing principle for collective will formation and for conflict resolution. In this post-traditional society - one artificially constructed from diverse political and cultural groups, without a shared ethos – only mutual (communicative) understanding can resolve differences and ensure solidarity. A lack of mutual understanding overburdens the adaptive capacity of the society, creating crises tendencies. Repression only intensified these tendencies, ensuring their eventual catastrophic explosion, 11 years civil conflict. State hindrances to social (communicative) interaction rendered the society incapable of realizing the requisite post conventional moral learning i.e. the social intelligence or problem-solving equipment required to resolve conflict, decolonize itself, neutralize normative power, shed dogmatic consciousness, change oppressive conventions, and influential customs. Thus, the study promotes civic virtues of post conventional morality (justice, truthfulness, moral rightness) as the key for liberating the society from its crisis-inducing colonial organizing principle. As the basis of sociology, the discipline the remains focused on society-wide problems, the theory of social evolution is adopted here to reconstruct the crisis in Sierra Leone’s constitutional democratic development. The study uses the rational reconstructive method to explicate problematic validity claims of norms, policy decisions, or the social order. The social order was rendered crisis-ridden because the reasons - the axis around which mutual understanding revolve - adduced for it cannot admit of consensus. The emerging social disintegration exemplifies use of deficient logic in social interaction, one below the requisite categorical moral cognitive consciousness. For this research, colonization is not necessarily externally induced, but forms of understanding in the political, legal, social, and educational interactions. The key point of the study is this: today Sierra Leone achieves solidarity, and decolonize from its conventional organizing principle, only if the state, economy, and civil society can find their limit in the socio-cultural domain.