David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
International Journal of Philosophical Studies 13 (3):405 – 437 (2005)
This paper presents a substantivist construal of discourse ethics, which claims that we should see our engagement in public deliberation as expressing and elaborating a substantive commitment to basic moral ideas of solidarity, equality, and freedom. This view is different from Habermas's standard formalist defence of discourse ethics, which attempts to derive the principle of discursive moral justification from primarily non-moral presuppositions of rational argumentation as such. After explicating the difference between the substantivist and the formalist construal, I defend the former by showing that it is not only intuitively compelling, but also particularly well equipped for addressing four important objections recently levelled against discourse ethics and its political applications (Rawls's concern that it lacks substantive guidelines, Gunnarsson's challenge that it has not been proven to be superior to alternative moral conceptions such as utilitarianism, Scanlon's complaint that it lacks an account of moral motivation, and Galston's and Young's worries that it could lead to political practices of cultural imposition). I conclude by pointing out some consequences of the previous discussion for the future of Critical Theory.
|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
Karl-Otto Apel (1980/1998). Towards a Transformation of Philosophy. Marquette University Press.
Brian M. Barry (1995). Justice as Impartiality. Oxford University Press.
Seyla Benhabib (1992). Situating the Self: Gender, Community, and Postmodernism in Contemporary Ethics. Routledge.
Joshua Cohen (1999). Reflections on Habermas on Democracy. Ratio Juris 12 (4):385-416.
James Gordon Finlayson (2000). Modernity and Morality in Habermas's Discourse Ethics. Inquiry 43 (3):319 – 340.
Citations of this work BETA
Stefan Rummens (2007). Democratic Deliberation as the Open-Ended Construction of Justice. Ratio Juris 20 (3):335-354.
Christian Rostbøll (2009). Dissent, Criticism, and Transformative Political Action in Deliberative Democracy. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 12 (1):19-36.
Similar books and articles
H. M. Malm (1989). Commodification or Compensation: A Reply to Ketchum. Hypatia 4 (3):128 - 135.
Cristina Lafont (2003). Procedural Justice?: Implications of the Rawls-Habermas Debate for Discourse Ethics. Philosophy and Social Criticism 29 (2):163-181.
H. E. Baber (1987). How Bad Is Rape? Hypatia 2 (2):125 - 138.
P. X. Monaghan (2010). A Novel Interpretation of Plato's Theory of Forms. Metaphysica 11 (1):63-78.
Jean Keller (2008). Dialogue Among Friends: Toward a Discourse Ethic of Interpersonal Relationships. Hypatia 23 (4):pp. 158-181.
Peter J. Taylor (1994). Shifting Frames: From Divided to Distributed Psychologies of Scientific Agents. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1994:304 - 310.
J. L. Schellenberg (2005). The Hiddenness Argument Revisited (II). Religious Studies 41 (3):287 - 303.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads39 ( #69,387 of 1,699,635 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #362,609 of 1,699,635 )
How can I increase my downloads?