This category needs an editor. We encourage you to help if you are qualified.
Volunteer, or read more about what this involves.
Related categories
Siblings:
42 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Order:
  1. Scott F. Aikin (2006). Democratic Deliberation, Public Reason, and Environmental Politics. Environmental Philosophy 3 (2):52-58.
    The activity of democratic deliberation is governed by the norm of public reason – namely, that reasons justifying public policy must both be pursuant of shared goods and be shareable by all reasonable discussants. Environmental policies based on controversial theories of value, as a consequence, are in danger of breaking the rule that would legitimate their enforcement.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  2. Randall E. Auxier (1992). Hanks on Habermas and Democratic Communication. Southwest Philosophy Review 8 (2):97-100.
  3. Gabriele Badano (2016). Still Special, Despite Everything: A Liberal Defence of the Value of Healthcare in the Face of the Social Determinants of Health. Social Theory and Practice 42 (1):183-204.
    Recent epidemiological research on the social determinants of health has been used to attack an important framework, associated with Norman Daniels, that depicts healthcare as special. My aim is to rescue the idea that healthcare has special importance in society, although specialness will turn out to be mainly limited to clinical care. I build upon the link between Daniels's theory and the work of John Rawls to develop a conception of public justification liberalism that is suitable to the field of (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  4. Christopher Bertram (1997). Political Justification, Theoretical Complexity, and Democratic Community. Ethics 107 (4):563-583.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  5. Thomas M. Besch, Public Justification, Inclusion, and Discursive Equality.
    The paper engages the view that robust public justification sits well with emancipatory and egalitarian intuitions. I distinguish between the depth, scope and the purchase of the kind of discursive respect that such justification allocates to people, and situate within this matrix Rawls’s paradigmatic conception of public justification. On the deep view of its role, Rawls-type public justification allocates a form of discursive respect that is deep in political liberalism’s order of justification, rich in purchase, but notoriously limited in scope. (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  6. Thomas M. Besch, Reflections on the Foundations of Human Rights.
    Is there an approach to human rights that justifies rights-allocating moral-political principles as principles that are equally acceptable by everyone to whom they apply, while grounding them in categorical, reasonably non-rejectable foundations? The paper examines Rainer Forst’s constructivist attempt to provide such an approach. I argue that his view, far from providing an alternative to “ethical” approaches, depends for its own reasonableness on a reasonably contestable conception of the good, namely, the good of constitutive discursive standing. This suggests a way (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  7. Thomas M. Besch (2014). On Discursive Respect. Social Theory and Practice 40 (2):207-231.
    Moral and political forms of constructivism accord to people strong, “constitutive” forms of discursive standing and so build on, or express, a commitment to discursive respect. The paper explores dimensions of discursive respect, i.e., depth, scope, and purchase; it addresses tenuous interdependencies between them; on this basis, it identifies limitations of the idea of discursive respect and of constructivism. The task of locating discursive respect in the normative space defined by its three dimensions is partly, and importantly, an ethical task (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  8. Thomas M. Besch (2013). On Political Legitimacy, Reasonableness, and Perfectionism. Public Reason 5 (1):58-74.
    The paper advances a non-orthodox reading of political liberalism’s view of political legitimacy, the view of public political justification that comes with it, and the idea of the reasonable at the heart of these views. Political liberalism entails that full discursive standing should be accorded only to people who are reasonable in a substantive sense. As the paper argues, this renders political liberalism dogmatic and exclusivist at the level of arguments for or against normative theories of justice. Against that background, (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  9. Thomas M. Besch (2012). Political Liberalism, the Internal Conception, and the Problem of Public Dogma. Philosophy and Public Issues 2 (1):153-177.
    According to the “internal” conception (Quong), political liberalism aims to be publicly justifiable only to people who are reasonable in a special sense specified and advocated by political liberalism itself. One advantage of the internal conception allegedly is that it enables liberalism to avoid perfectionism. The paper takes issue with this view. It argues that once the internal conception is duly pitched at its fundamental, metatheoretical level and placed in its proper discursive context, it emerges that it comes at the (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  10. Thomas M. Besch (2004). On Practical Constructivism and Reasonableness. Dissertation, University of Oxford
    The dissertation defends that the often-assumed link between constructivism and universalism builds on non-constructivist, perfectionist grounds. To this end, I argue that an exemplary form of universalist constructivism – i.e., O’Neill’s Kantian constructivism – can defend its universalist commitments against an influential particularist form of constructivism – i.e., political liberalism as advanced by Rawls, Macedo, and Larmore – only if it invokes a perfectionist view of the good. (En route, I show why political liberalism is a form of particularism and (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  11. Thomas M. Besch (1998). Über John Rawls' Politischen Liberalismus. Peter Lang.
    (In German.) The book addresses Rawls's post-1985 political liberalism. His justification of political liberalism -- as reflected in his arguments from overlapping consensus -- faces the problem that liberal content can be justified as reciprocally acceptable only if the addressees of such a justification already endorse points of view that suitably support liberal ideas. Rawls responds to this legitimacy-theoretical problem by restricting public justification's scope to include reasonable people only, while implicitly defining reasonableness as a substantive liberal virtue. But this (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  12. Paul Billingham (forthcoming). Review Essay: Consensus, Convergence, Restraint, and Religion. Journal of Moral Philosophy.
    This essay critically assesses the central claim of Kevin Vallier’s Liberal Politics and Public Faith: that public religious faith and public reason liberalism can be reconciled, because the values underlying public reason liberalism should lead us to endorse the ‘convergence view’, rather than the mainstream consensus view. The convergence view is friendlier to religious faith, because it jettisons the consensus view’s much-criticised ‘duty of restraint’. I present several challenges to Vallier’s claim. Firstly, if Vallier is right to reject the duty (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  13. Ricardo Blaug (2000). Citizenship and Political Judgment: Between Discourse Ethics and Phronesis. Res Publica 6 (2):179-198.
    Political judgment is notoriously hard to theorise, and in the recent debates surrounding Habermas's discourse ethics we encounter classic disagreements around the nature, operation and validity of such judgments. This paper evaluates Habermas's account of political judgment and explores the problems raised by his critics. It then focuses on the contentious role played by universals within his account. What emerges is a reformulated theory of judgment based on the thin universalism of fair deliberation, and a description of a sub-set of (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  14. James W. Boettcher (2005). Strong Inclusionist Accounts of the Role of Religion in Political Decision-Making. Journal of Social Philosophy 36 (4):497–516.
  15. James Bohman (1999). Citizenship and Norms of Publicity: Wide Public Reason in Cosmopolitan Societies. Political Theory 27 (2):176-202.
  16. Emanuela Ceva (2015). Political Justification Through Democratic Participation. Social Theory and Practice 41 (1):26-50.
    On a proceduralist account of democracy, collective decisions derive their jus- tification—at least in part—from the qualities of the process through which they have been made. To fulfill its justificatory function, this process should ensure that citizens have an equal right to political participation as a respectful response to their equal status as agents capable of self-legislation. How should democratic participation be understood if it is to offer such a procedural justification for democratic decisions? I suggest that, in order to (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  17. Mark Evans (2006). Thin Universalism and the "Limits" of Justification. In B. A. Haddock, Peri Roberts & Peter Sutch (eds.), Principles and Political Order: The Challenge of Diversity. Routledge
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  18. A. Ferrara (2004). Public Reason and the Normativity of the Reasonable. Philosophy and Social Criticism 30 (5-6):579-596.
    The main purpose of the paper is to contribute to reconstructing the kind of normativity underlying Rawls’s notion of public reason and of the reasonable. The implicit target is the somewhat popular view according to which the transition from the framework of A Theory of Justice to that of Political Liberalism would entail a loss of normativity. On the contrary, the related ideas of public reason and the reasonable are argued to presuppose a notion of normativity – linked with judgment (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  19. Danny Frederick (2013). Social Contract Theory Should Be Abandoned. Rationality, Markets and Morals 4:178-89.
    I argue that social-contract theory cannot succeed because reasonable people may always disagree, and that social-contract theory is irrelevant to the problem of the legitimacy of a form of government or of a system of moral rules. I note the weakness of the appeal to implicit agreement, the conflation of legitimacy with stability, the undesirability of “public justification” and the apparent blindness to the evolutionary critical-rationalist approach of Hayek and Popper. I employ that approach to sketch answers to the theoretical, (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  20. Christopher Freiman (2013). Utilitarianism and Public Justification. Journal of Social Philosophy 44 (3):250-269.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  21. Gerald Gaus (2012). Justification, Choice and Promise: Three Devices of the Consent Tradition in a Diverse Society. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 15 (2):109-127.
    The twin ideas at the heart of the social contract tradition are that persons are naturally free and equal, and that genuine political obligations must in some way be based on the consent of those obligated. The Lockean tradition has held that consent must be in the form of explicit choice; Kantian contractualism has insisted on consent as rational endorsement. In this paper I seek to bring the Kantian and Lockean contract traditions together. Kantian rational justification and actual choice are (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  22. John Horton (2003). Rawls, Public Reason and the Limits of Liberal Justification. Contemporary Political Theory 2 (1):5.
    This article is a contribution to a critical exploration of the liberal project of normatively justifying basic political principles. The specific focus is John Rawls's use of the idea of public reason. After briefly discussing the evolution of Rawls's ideas from A Theory of Justice to his most recent writings, the key components of his conception of public reason are set out. Two principal lines of criticism are developed. The first is that the criteria of legitimacy Rawls establishes for a (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  23. Genevieve Fuji Johnson (2012). And, I Mean Every Word of It: Comments on Francis Dupuis-D�Ri�s �Global Protesters Versus Global Elite: Are Direct Action and Deliberative Politics Compatible?�. Les ateliers de l'éthique/The Ethics Forum 7 (1):103-111.
    Focusing on how recent protests centered on global economic and environmental injustices can contribute to furthering deliberative politics and realizing deliberative democracy, Francis Dupuis- D � ri examines the important and historical tension between force and persuasion. However, casting protest as legitimate in the framework of deliberative politics and as serving deliberative democracy obscures its own value in endeavors to achieve social, economic, and environmental justice. Being sympathetic to Dupuis- D � ri � s work, I wish to make several, (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  24. Justine Lacroix (2010). Review Article: Come o Liberals, Try Harder … Glyn Morgan The Idea of a European Superstate: Public Justification and European Integration. Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2005. Jan-Werner Müller Constitutional Patriotism. Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2007. [REVIEW] European Journal of Political Theory 9 (2):227-234.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  25. R. J. Leland & Han van Wietmarschen (2012). Reasonableness, Intellectual Modesty, and Reciprocity in Political Justification. Ethics 122 (4):721-747.
    Political liberals ask citizens not to appeal to certain considerations, including religious and philosophical convictions, in political deliberation. We argue that political liberals must include a demanding requirement of intellectual modesty in their ideal of citizenship in order to motivate this deliberative restraint. The requirement calls on each citizen to believe that the best reasoners disagree about the considerations that she is barred from appealing to. Along the way, we clarify how requirements of intellectual modesty relate to moral reasons for (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  26. Andrew Lister (2010). Liberal Foundations of Democratic Authority. Representation 46 (1):19-34.
    In Democratic Authority, David Estlund argues that decision-procedures are to be judged solely by their tendency to generate morally superior decisions, but that because any relationship of authority must be acceptable to all qualified moral points of view, the epistemic benefits of less equal procedures must be evident beyond qualified objection. If all doctrines involved in political justification must be qualifiedly acceptable, however, the qualified acceptability requirement must itself be acceptable to qualified points of view. This article provides reasons for (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  27. Matthew Lister (2009). Criminal Law Conversations: "Desert: Empirical, Not Metaphysical" and "Contractualism and the Sharing of Wrongs". In Paul Robinson, Kimberly Ferzan & Stephen Garvey (eds.), Criminal Law Conversations.
    Following are two short contributions to the book, _Criminal Law Conversations_: commentaries on Paul Robinson's discussion of "Empirical Desert" and Antony Duff & Sandra Marshal's discussion of the sharing of wrongs.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  28. Alice MacLachlan & C. Allen Speight (eds.) (2013). Justice, Responsibility, and Reconciliation in the Wake of Conflict. Springer.
    What are the moral obligations of participants and bystanders during—and in the wake of –a conflict? How have theoretical understandings of justice, peace and responsibility changed in the face of contemporary realities of war? Drawing on the work of leading scholars in the fields of philosophy, political theory, international law, religious studies and peace studies, the collection significantly advances current literature on war, justice and post-conflict reconciliation. Contributors address some of the most pressing issues of international and civil conflict, including (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  29. Gabriel Monette (2015). Républicanisme ou démocratie en entreprise. Ithaque 17:45-60.
    L’objectif de cet article est de montrer que le républicanisme d’entreprise développé par Hsieh ne protège pas les travailleurs contre l’ensemble des interférences arbitraires. Comme ils sont fondés uniquement sur la contestation des décisions, les arrangements institutionnels que Hsieh propose n’arrivent pas à saisir l’ensemble des formes que peut prendre la domination. Pour ce faire, nous utiliserons la critique développée par McCormick des institutions républicaines. Pour exploiter cette critique et l’appliquer au contexte d’entreprise, nous aurons besoin de présenter les arguments (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  30. Thomas Mulligan (2015). On the Compatibility of Epistocracy and Public Reason. Social Theory and Practice 41 (3):458-476.
    In "epistocratic" forms of government, political power is wielded by those who possess the knowledge relevant to good policymaking. Some democrats--notably, David Estlund--concede that epistocracy might produce better political outcomes than democracy but argue that epistocracy cannot be justified under public reason. These objections to epistocracy are unsound because they violate a viability constraint: they are also fatal to democracy and all other plausible political arrangements. Moreover, there is a problem with the public reason framework itself--a problem that can only (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  31. María G. Navarro (forthcoming). Öffentlichkeit Versus Wissen? In Wenchao Li (ed.), Der Wandel des Verhältnisses von Philosophie und Öffentlichkeit vom 17. zum 19. Jhdt. Studia Leibnitiana, Steiner Verlag
    Der Kodex, mit dem sich die Produzenten des universellen Wissens in der Gelehrtenrepublik identifizierten, befindet sich während des 18. Jahrhunderts im Wandel. Dies entnehmen wir einer bekannten Studie von Goldgar (1995), die unter anderem von der Ausbreitung der Zeitungspresse handelt. Zum Teil war dieser Umstand durch die Erfordernisse zeitgenössischer Höflichkeits- und Zivilitätskonzepte bedingt, aber auch den ökonomischen Aspekten eines stoßkräftigen Verlagsmarktes geschuldet, der sich aus dem damaligen Aufstieg der sogenannten Papierzeitungen ergab.
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  32. Jonathan A. Neufeld (2013). Billy Budd's Song: Authority and Music in the Public Sphere. Opera Quarterly 28 (3-4):172-191.
    While Billy Budd's beauty has often been connected to his innocence and his moral goodness, the significance of the musical character of his beauty—what I will argue is the site of a struggle for political expression—has not been remarked upon by commentators of Melville's novella. It has, however, been deeply explored by Britten's opera. Music has often been situated at, or just beyond, the limits of communication; it has served as a medium of the ineffable, of unsaid and unsayable truths (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  33. Kevin Olson (2013). Judgment or Justification? Two Paths for Rethinking the Discursive Turn On Albena Azmanova, The Scandal of Reason: A Critical Theory of Political Judgment. New York: Columbia University Press, 2012 and Rainer Forst, The Right to Justification: Elements of a Constructivist Theory of Justice, Trans. Jeffrey Flynn. New York: Columbia University Press, 2012. [REVIEW] Constellations 20 (2):361-365.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  34. Fabienne Peter (2015). A Companion to Rawls. [REVIEW] Ethics 125 (2):591-596.
  35. Fabienne Peter (2007). Rawls' Idea of Public Reason and Democratic Legitimacy. Journal of International Political Theory 3 (1):129-143.
    Critics and defenders of Rawls' idea of public reason have tended to neglect the relationship between this idea and his conception of democratic legitimacy. I shall argue that Rawls' idea of public reason can be interpreted in two different ways, and that the two interpretations support two different conceptions of legitimacy. What I call the substantive interpretation of Rawls' idea of public reason demands that it applies not just to the process of democratic decision-making, but that it extends to the (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  36. Enzo Rossi (2010). Modus Vivendi, Consensus, and (Realist) Liberal Legitimacy. Public Reason 2 (2):21-39.
    A polity is grounded in a modus vivendi (MV) when its main features can be presented as the outcome of a virtually unrestricted bargaining process. Is MV compatible with the consensus-based account of liberal legitimacy, i.e. the view that political authority is well grounded only if the citizenry have in some sense freely consented to its exercise? I show that the attraction of MV for consensus theorists lies mainly in the thought that a MV can be presented as legitimated through (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  37. Narve Strand (2011). World That Matters: Reply to Poul Houe. In Roman Kralik & Abrahim H. Kahn (eds.), In the Shadow of Kierkegaard. Kierkegaard Circle, University of Toronto/Central European Research Institiute of Søren Kierkegaard
  38. François Tanguay-Renaud (2013). Basic Challenges for Governance in Emergencies. In Alice MacLachlan & C. Allen Speight (eds.), Justice, Responsibility, and Reconciliation in the Wake of Conflict. Springer
    What are emergencies and why do they matter? In this chapter (in its penultimate version), I seek to outline the morally significant features of the concept of emergency, and demonstrate how these features generate corresponding first- and second-order challenges and responsibilities for those in a position to do something about them. In section A, I contend that emergencies are situations in which there is a risk of serious harm and a need to react urgently if that harm is to be (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  39. Kevin Vallier (2014). Liberal Politics and Public Faith: Beyond Separation. Routledge.
    In the eyes of many, liberalism requires the aggressive secularization of social institutions, especially public media and public schools. The unfortunate result is that many Americans have become alienated from the liberal tradition because they believe it threatens their most sacred forms of life. This was not always the case: in American history, the relation between liberalism and religion has often been one of mutual respect and support. In Liberal Politics and Public Faith: Beyond Separation, Kevin Vallier attempts to reestablish (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  40. Kevin Vallier (2011). Against Public Reason Liberalism's Accessibility Requirement. Journal of Moral Philosophy 8 (3):366-389.
    Public reason liberals typically defend an accessibility requirement for reasons offered in public political dialog. The accessibility requirement holds that public reasons must be amenable to criticism, evaluable by reasonable persons, and the like. Public reason liberals are therefore hostile to the public use of reasons that appear inaccessible, especially religious reasons. This hostility has provoked strong reactions from public reason liberalism's religion-friendly critics. But public reason liberals and their religion-friendly critics need not be at odds because the accessibility requirement (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  41. Kevin Vallier (2011). Convergence and Consensus in Public Reason. Public Affairs Quarterly 25 (4):261-280.
    Reasonable individuals often share a rationale for a decision but, in other cases, they make the same decision based on disparate and often incompatible rationales. The social contract tradition has been divided between these two methods of solving the problem of social cooperation: must social cooperation occur in terms of common reasoning, or can individuals with different doctrines simply converge on shared institutions for their own reasons? For Hobbes, it is rational for all persons, regardless of their theological beliefs, to (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  42. Fabian Wendt (2013). Universalisierbarkeit und öffentliche Rechtfertigung. Zeitschrift für Philosophische Forschung 67 (4):587-609.
    The principle of public justification is a main principle of public reason liberalism, one of the most influential versions of contemporary liberalism. In Gerald Gaus’s version it claims that rules of social morality, state institutions and laws have to be justifiable to all citizens with their varying evaluative standards. To be justifiable, each and every citizen has to have sufficient reasons to accept the rules, institutions or laws from his or her own perspective. The principle of universalizability, in contrast, is (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography