The paper aims to rethink about the role of “public intellectuals” in Italy starting from Gramsci’s idea of the “organic intellectual”. Gramsci famously argued a specific role of the intellectuals in supporting the development of the subordinated classes. The notion of the “organic intellectual” played a key function in his theory of cultural hegemony. On this account, the organic intellectuals shape and support the hegemonic relations within the ruling class, thus the challenge for revolutionary political party is to cultivate a group of organic intellectuals that grows with the subordinated classes and support their counter-hegemonic objectives.
In this view, political and philosophical theorising cannot be isolated from his 'actual' historical, social and political function and, thus, the role of intellectual should be primarily understood as practice-oriented. Gramsci’s legacy has deeply influenced the ways in which Italian thinkers have articulated their view of public intellectual engagement. This paper focuses on one specific alternative to Gramsci's view emerged within the group of Italian analytical scholars in the last decades: the "organic intellectual" will be therefore opposed to a new model that I call the “public intellectual”. In contrast with Gramsci's view, this new account seems to reproduce a typical Rawlsian account of ethical thinking, that is the method of ‘reflective equilibrium’. On this account, intellectuals’ confrontation with practical problems and their public engagement is directly linked to bridge the gap between theoretical assumptions and practical problems.
Starting from Gramsci’s view, this paper therefore considers the articulation of public engagement of important Italian intellectuals of the last century, such as Benedetto Croce and Norberto Bobbio. Finally, it focuses on Maffettone’s legacy with special emphasis on his account of Rawlsian political theory with a strong orientation toward public engagement. Maffettone has been the first ‘Rawlsian’ scholar in Italy who tried to combine his theoretical work, as an academic, with a broader mission, as a public intellectual, that he developed in what he called “etica pubblica (public ethics)”.
