Abstract
This paper makes an attempt to philosophically re-construct what I have termed as a fundamental paradox at the heart of deontological liberalism. It is argued that liberalism attempts to create the possibilities of rational consensus and of bringing people together socially and politically by developing methodologies which overcome the divisive nature of essentially parochial substantive conceptions of the good. Such methodologies relying on the supposed universally valid dictates of reason and notions of procedural rationality proceed by disengaging men from the divisive particularities of their plural value contexts. That disengagement is sought to be achieved by conceptualizing the individual as self sufficient in her moral and epistemic being thereby conceptually isolating individual man from the other. The liberal effort to create rational consensus which can bring people together then gets off the ground by isolating the individual from the other. This I have termed as the paradox of the self and the other or alternatively the paradox of social atomism and universalism. As a possible philosophical alternative this paper makes an attempt to re-construct Gandhi’s conceptualization of the relationship between swaraj as self rule and Satyagraha as non-violent resistance. This Gandhian connection, it is argued, has the potential to transform the moral psychology of our response to the other, thereby posing a challenge to the modern, predominantly liberal, conceptualization of such a response.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bilgrami, A. (2006). Gandhi’s integrity: The philosophy behind the politics. In A. Raghuramaraju (Ed.), Debating Gandhi: A reader (pp. 248–268). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bondurant, J. (1964). Satyagraha vs. Duragraha. In R. Guha (Ed.), Gandhi: His relevance for our times. Bombay: Vidya Bhavan. Quoted in, Dalton, D. (2004) Nonviolence in Action: Gandhi’s Power (p. 70) New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Crowder, G. (1994). Pluralism and liberalism. Political Studies, 62, 293–305.
Crowder, G. (2004). Isaiah Berlin: Liberty and pluralism. England: Polity Press.
Flathman, R. E. (1998). It all depends on how one understands liberalism. A brief response to Stephen Macedo. Political Theory, 26(1), 81–84.
Gandhi, M. K. (1909/1997). In A. J. Parel (Ed.), Hind Swaraj and other writings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gandhi, M. K. (1917a). The collected works of Mahatma Gandhi vol. 14 (pp. 64–65). New Delhi: Publications Division.
Gandhi, M. K. (1917b). The collected works of Mahatma Gandhi vol. 19 (p. 80). New Delhi: Publications Division.
Gandhi, M. K. (1922). Ethical religion. Madras: S. Ganesan Publishers.
Gandhi, M. K. (2002). Collected works of Mahatma Gandhi vol. 88:100. Quoted in A. J. Parel (Ed.), Gandhi, Freedom and Self- Rule. New Delhi: Vistaar Publications.
Gandhi, M. K. (2008). India of my dreams. Ahmedabad: Navajivan Publishing House.
Gier, N. F. (2008). Nonviolence as a civic virtue: Gandhi and reformed liberalism. In D. Allen (Ed.), The philosophy of Mahatma Gandhi for the twenty-first century (pp. 121–142). New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Guyer, P. (Ed.). (1992). The Cambridge companion to Kant. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Kant, I. (1785/1956). Groundwork of the metaphysics of morals. (Trans.) H. J. Paton. New York: Harper & Row.
Kant, I. (1996). The critique of practical reason. In M. J. Gregor (Ed.), Immanuel Kant’s practical philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Macedo, S. (1990). Liberal virtues. Citizenship,virtue,and community in liberal constitutionalism. New York: Oxford University Press.
Macedo, S. (1988). Liberal Virtues, Constitutional Community. Review of Politics, 50(2), 215–240.
Macedo, S. (1998). Transformative constitutionalism and the case of religion. Defending the moderate hegemony of liberalism. Political Theory, 26(1), 56–80.
Macintyre, A. (1981). After virtue a study in moral theory. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
Macintyre, A. (1988). Whose justice? Which rationality? London: Duckworth.
Miri, M. (2003). Identity and the moral life. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Murty, V. V. R. (Ed.). (1970). Gandhi essential writings. New Delhi: Gandhi Peace Foundation.
Raghuramaraju, A. (2004). Internal criticism in democracies outside the west. Alternatives, 34, 339–358.
Rawls, J. (2005). Political liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press.
Sandel, M. J. (2008). Liberalism and the limits of justice. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Taylor, C. (1985). Human agency and language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Taylor, C. (1989). Sources of the self. The making of the modern identity. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Terchek, R. J. (2002). Gandhian autonomy in the late modern world. In A. J. Parel (Ed.), Gandhi, freedom and self-rule. New Delhi: Vistaar Publications.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Puri, B. The Self and the Other: Liberalism and Gandhi. Philosophia 39, 673–698 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-011-9323-8
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-011-9323-8