ABSTRACT
This chapter distinguishes between political philosophy's prescriptive and evaluative aims and it assesses the performance of the relevant methodological approaches here investigated with respect to such different goals. It shows the revised version of realistic utopianism, realism and utopianism are all apt to vindicate the theoretical adequacy of their proposed principles and models, but the practical relevance of similar principles and models is still to be assessed. The chapter ascertains what it means for theoretically defined normative principles and models to be practically significant. It argues that normative criteria should meet different conditions in order to be practically relevant, depending on the different purposes prescriptive or evaluative political philosophy endorses. Normative political philosophy performs heterogeneous functions and, as noticed, it has at its disposal diversified methodological strategies and tools, which allow it to successfully fulfill different normative tasks. It separates addressing prescription and evaluation is functional for investigating the practical relevance of political philosophy's normative claims.
