Will Kymlicka has recently (in Analyse & Kritik 14, 33-56) argued that western liberals are mistaken in assuming that religious pluralism presupposes a commitment to individual rights. He instances the millet system of the Ottoman Empire as a successful form of toleration based on group rather than individual rights. In the course of his argument he makes some remarks about British Muslims and arranged marriages, sexual segregation in education and the Rushdie Affair which are false or highly misleading though typical (...) of the prejudice-cum-ignorance with which British and other intellectuals discuss Muslims. (shrink)

I accept Kymlicka’s admission that his remarks on arranged marriages and sex-segregated education were misleading, and continue to contest his description of British Muslim perspectives on the Rushdie Affair. By not recognising that Muslims are adapting to western legal systems and political culture he contributes to a polarisation and fails to see that liberals do have something to be optimistic about.

In this article, we articulate and defend a contextual approach to political theory. According to what we shall call ‘iterative contextualism’, context has two important roles to play in determining what is required by justice. First, it is through the exploration and evaluation of multiple contexts that general principles are devised, revised and refined. Second, significant weight should be given to the norms to be found in specific contexts because the people affected by those norms strongly identify with them. Having (...) said this, the application of general principles to particular contexts may still result in recommendations which deviate to some degree from the prevailing norms. In this case, we shall argue that although justice requires something other than what local norms say, what is required is likely to be intimated by the relevant context. Thus, whilst considerations of identification act as significant constraints on iterative contextualists’ thinking, the idea of intimations provides them with an important resource. (shrink)

In this article, we present a case for the recognition of multiple religions, arguing that states have a non-absolute duty to recognise religions which it is likely they should discharge along different dimensions and to different degrees. More concretely, we focus on several Western European states (or regions thereof), arguing that they would be more legitimate if they were to recognise an extensive range of faiths and ethno-religious groups. In order to make this argument, we deploy a method of iterative (...) contextualism, consisting of two interlocking steps which can be thought of as obverse halves of a hermeneutic circle. First we identify and describe two cross-contextual principles, which we call identification and discretionary recognition. Then we suggest how it may be shown that these principles are already present to a significant degree in Denmark, Finland and Alsace-Moselle – the three contexts with which we are particularly concerned here. This, then, is a normatively robust and contextually sensitive argument for the multidimensional recognition of religion by a state, and at the same time it explains how we apply the method of iterative contextualism. (shrink)

It was only a few years ago that the central topic of academic political philosophy, at least in the English-speaking world, was distributive justice. The focus was very much on economic or material goods; the question being whether people were entitled to have what they had, or did justice require that someone else should have some of it. That the arguments about justice led to investigating the conceptions of self, rationality and community that underpinned them meant that the debate was (...) far from governed by economics and welfare, and was capable of moving in many directions and far from its starting-point. Yet that many of the leading participants in the ‘liberalism v . communitarianism’ debate should now have come to place diversity, pluralism and multiculturalism at the centre of their theorising, with the emphasis being on the justness of cultural rather than economic transactions, is surely not just a product of ‘following the argument to where it leads’. The change in philosophical focus is also determined by changes in the political world; by the challenges of feminism, the growing recognition that most Western societies are, partly because of movements of populations, increasingly multi-ethnic and multi-racial, and the growing questioning of whether the pursuit of a universal theory of justice may not itself be an example of a Western cultural imperialism. The politics I am pointing to is various and by no means harmonious, but a common feature perhaps is the insistence that there are forms of inequality and domination beyond those of economics and material distributions. (shrink)

We explore aspects of what it means to be a ‘moderate’ Muslim in Britain. Based on interviews with 21 Muslim intellectuals or those active in public or community debates, we examine what these Muslims think about multiculturalism. While there is a variety of views, the respondents are promulticulturalism as long as it includes faith as a dimension of ‘difference’, something they believe has only belatedly, tentatively and slowly happened in Britain. Most of the other aspects of the multicultural ideal and (...) criticisms of contemporary British practice, such as the distinction between mutual respect and tolerance, the importance of non-separateness and dialogue, the need for transformative change on the part of the minorities as well as the majority, seem to be similar to the views held by non-Muslim British multiculturalists. Yet some believe that the Qur’an, Islam and Muslim history are powerful sources of multi-culturalism and represent a form superior to any that has been developed elsewhere or is on offer in the contemporary West. This view was held by those who are experts in using and engaging with contemporary Western discourses rather than those who are authorities in interpreting Islamic texts, and so they, like most others in the group could be said to be a relatively new kind of Muslim public figure. (shrink)

This volume brings together academics from a variety of disciplines to discuss Collingwood's contributions to philosophy, aesthetics, philosophy of history, political philosophy and archaeological theory. It begins with a general survey of his contribution to history, politics and philosophy.

Entry on the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. A summary of the literature on whether externalism about thought content precludes non-empirical knowledge of one's own thoughts.

The Cartesian thinking self may seem indisputably real. But if it is real, then so thinking, which would undercut mental fictionalism. Thus, in defense of mental fictionalism, this paper argues for fictionalism about the thinking self. In short form, the argument is: (1) If I exist outside of fiction, then I am identical to (some part of/) this biomass [= my body]. (2) If I die at t, I cease to exist at t. (3) If I die at t, no (...) part of this biomass ceases to exist at t. (4) Therefore, no part of this biomass is identical to me. [From (2), (3)] (5) Therefore, I do not exist outside of fiction. [From (4), (1)] One reply to the argument is that the self is an aggregate of electricity in the brain which disperses upon death. The rejoinder is that this, at best, describes the thoughts realized in the brain, and not the subject who thinks the thoughts. A second objection stresses the undeniable sense that the thinking self has a location. In reply, the extended thought-experiment from Dennett’s “Where Am I?” is used to show that the sense of self-location may well be illusory. (shrink)

Bioethical issues remain front-page news, with debate continuing to rage over issues including genetic modification, animal cloning, and "designer babies." With public opinion often driven by media speculation, how can we ensure that informed decisions regarding key bioethical issues are made in a reasoned, objective way? Ideal for students new to the subject, Bioethics: An Introduction for the Biosciences offers a balanced, objective introduction to the field. With a focus on developing powers of reasoning and judgment, the book presents different (...) perspectives on common themes in an impartial way, thereby fostering debate and discussion. The opening section, "The Ethical Groundwork," introduces students to the nature of bioethics and ethical theory. The book goes on to cover a broad range of bioethical issues relating to people, animals, and food, before concluding with an overview of bioethics in practice. Features: * The broadest, most balanced textbook on bioethics available, offering students just the right mix of science and philosophy as well as a clear, objective introduction to the subject * Presents different perspectives on common themes in order to encourage students to question, evaluate, and form their own opinions * Incorporates many useful pedagogical tools including self-assessment questions, topics for discussion, and exercises * Includes references for further reading and useful web sites * A companion website offers resources for both students and instructors. (shrink)