David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Moral Philosophy 10 (5):598-620 (2013)
At the core of political liberalism is the claim that political institutions must be publicly justified or justifiable to be legitimate. What explains the significance of public justification? The main argument that defenders of political liberalism present is an argument from disagreement: the irreducible pluralism that is characteristic of democratic societies requires a mode of justification that lies in between a narrowly political solution based on actual acceptance and a traditional moral solution based on justification from the third-person perspective. But why should we take disagreements seriously? This – epistemic question – has not received the attention it deserves so far. I argue that the significance of public justification can be explained through the possibility of reasonable disagreement. In a reasonable disagreement, the parties hold mutually incompatible beliefs, but each is justified to hold the belief they do. I shall use the notion of a reasonable disagreement to explain the possibility of an irreducible pluralism of moral and religious doctrines and, on that basis, why the justification of political institutions has to be public.
|Keywords||public justification disagreement Rawls|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Enzo Rossi (2013). Legitimacy, Democracy and Public Justification: Rawls' Political Liberalism Versus Gaus' Justificatory Liberalism. Res Publica (1):1-17.
Jonathan Quong (2005). Disagreement, Asymmetry, and Liberal Legitimacy. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 4 (3):301-330.
Glen Newey (2011). Toleration as Sedition. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 14 (3):363-384.
Alan Carter (2006). Political Liberalism and Political Compliance: Part 2 of the Problem of Political Compliance in Rawls’s Theories of Justice. Journal of Moral Philosophy 3 (2):135-157.
F. Freyenhagen (2011). Taking Reasonable Pluralism Seriously: An Internal Critique of Political Liberalism. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 10 (3):323-342.
Gerald F. Gaus (1999). Reasonable Pluralism and the Domain of the Political: How the Weaknesses of John Rawls's Political Liberalism Can Be Overcome by a Justificatory Liberalism. Inquiry 42 (2):259 – 284.
Micah Schwartzman (2004). The Completeness of Public Reason. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 3 (2):191-220.
James Boettcher (2004). What is Reasonableness? Philosophy and Social Criticism 30 (5-6):597-621.
Thomas M. Besch (2012). Political Liberalism, the Internal Conception, and the Problem of Public Dogma. Philosophy and Public Issues 2 (1):153-177.
Micah Schwartzman (2012). The Ethics of Reasoning From Conjecture. Journal of Moral Philosophy 9 (4):521-544.
Torben Bech Dyrberg (2005). The Democratic Ideology of Right–Left and Public Reason in Relation to Rawls's Political Liberalism. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 8 (2):161-176.
Gerald Gaus & Kevin Vallier (2009). The Roles of Religious Conviction in a Publicly Justified Polity: The Implications of Convergence, Asymmetry and Political Institutions. Philosophy and Social Criticism 35 (1-2):51-76.
James W. Boettcher (2003). “Political, Not Metaphysical”. Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 77:205-219.
S. Ganghof (2013). Does Public Reason Require Super-Majoritarian Democracy? Liberty, Equality, and History in the Justification of Political Institutions. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 12 (2):179-196.
Added to index2012-10-13
Total downloads114 ( #6,638 of 1,015,187 )
Recent downloads (6 months)25 ( #3,734 of 1,015,187 )
How can I increase my downloads?