David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Political Theory 35 (5):598 - 623 (2007)
The solutions to moral problems offered by contemporary moral theories largely depend on how they understand pluralism. This article compares two different kinds of universal moral theories, liberal impartiality theory and discourse ethics. It defends the twofold thesis that (1) a dialogical theory such as discourse ethics is better equipped to give an account of pluralism than impartiality theory due to a more correct understanding of the nature of conflict, but that (2) discourse ethics cannot, contrary to what Jürgen Habermas claims, embrace the notion of impartiality connected to agent-neutrality. The article argues that pluralism reflects conflicts among values not only between but also within people and that discourse ethics can include both these dimensions since it recognizes the constitutive connection between deliberation and (moral) conflict. Thus, unlike impartiality theory, it can elucidate the transformative aspects of pluralism.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Craig L. Carr (2010). Liberalism and Pluralism: The Politics of E Pluribus Unum. Palgrave Macmillan.
Warren French & David Allbright (1998). Resolving a Moral Conflict Through Discourse. Journal of Business Ethics 17 (2):177-194.
W. S. K. Cameron (2009). Tapping Habermas's Discourse Theory for Environmental Ethics. Environmental Ethics 31 (4):339-357.
Jurgen de Wispelaere (2004). Altruism, Impartiality, and Moral Demands. In Jonathan Seglow (ed.), Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy. F. Cass Publishers 9-33.
Andrew Lister (2011). Democracy and Moral Conflict. Social Theory and Practice 37 (2):363-370.
Robert B. Talisse (2011). Value Pluralism and Liberal Politics. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 14 (1):87-100.
Marilea Bramer (2010). The Importance of Personal Relationships in Kantian Moral Theory: A Reply to Care Ethics. Hypatia 25 (1):121-139.
Alan Gewirth (1983). The Rationality of Reasonableness. Synthese 57 (2):225 - 247.
Stuart Toddington (2006). The Moral Truth About Discourse Theory. Ratio Juris 19 (2):217-229.
Amy Gutmann & Dennis Thompson (2000). Why Deliberative Democracy is Different. Social Philosophy and Policy 17 (01):161-.
Ragnar Francén Olinder (2012). Moral and Metaethical Pluralism: Unity in Variation. Southern Journal of Philosophy 50 (4):583-601.
J. Baird Callicott (1990). The Case Against Moral Pluralism. Environmental Ethics 12 (2):99-124.
Charles W. Wright (2004). Particularity and Perspective Taking: On Feminism and Habermas's Discourse Theory of Morality. Hypatia 19 (4):47-74.
Added to index2011-05-29
Total downloads15 ( #175,574 of 1,726,249 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #369,877 of 1,726,249 )
How can I increase my downloads?