David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
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. 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
Thomas Scanlon (1998). What We Owe to Each Other. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
John Rawls (1993). Political Liberalism. Columbia University Press.
J. Rawls (1995). Political Liberalism. Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie 57 (3):596-598.
Thomas Pogge (2005). World Poverty and Human Rights. Ethics and International Affairs 19 (1):1–7.
David M. Rasmussen, Jurgen Habermas, Christian Lenhardt & Shierry Weber Nicholsen (1993). Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action. Philosophical Quarterly 43 (173):571.
Citations of this work BETA
Stefan Rummens (2007). Democratic Deliberation as the Open-Ended Construction of Justice. Ratio Juris 20 (3):335-354.
Pablo Gilabert (2006). Considerations on the Notion of Moral Validity in the Moral Theories of Kant and Habermas. Kant-Studien 97 (2):210-227.
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. Religious Studies 41 (3):287-303.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads44 ( #95,279 of 1,907,401 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #343,301 of 1,907,401 )
How can I increase my downloads?