This paper will begin by clarifying the kind of context, which requires toleration. My point of departure is a characterization of modernity that both departs from the classical modern theory of secularization and draws from the current research on multiple modernities. Because of the more or less recent resurgence of religion we can no longer characterize toleration on the basis of a theory of secularization. This will lead to the definition of conflict and tolerance within the confines of a post-secular (...) society. The philosophical component of the concept of toleration will be taken from both Aristotle and Kant in the sense that toleration is not only a necessary virtue in modern society, it is also a normative notion based on respect for the law. Finally, the paper concludes that toleration must be conceived of as a principle of justice in a society that requires respect not only for the rights of others but for their cultures as well. (shrink)
v. 1. The engagement with postmodernity and phenomenology. Hermeneutics and epistemology. Metaphysics -- v. 2. Normativity and reason. Discourse ethics -- v. 3. Law, democracy, and the public sphere. Cosmopolitanism and the nation state -- v. 4. Habermas and psychology. Habermas and bioethics. Habermas and feminism. Aesthetics. Habermas and religion. Habermas and science.
Phenomenology and Critical Theory sprang from the same historical root, namely, eighteenth- and nineteenth-century Enlightenment and post-Enlightenment thought. In my Handbook of Critical Theory,1 I traced the development of Critical Theory from its Hegelian and Marxist origins to its manifestation in the first and second generations of the so-called Frankfurt School. Although I won't do the same for phenomenology here, it is worth noting that the two traditions, phenomenology and Critical Theory, share Kant's idea of practical philosophy, with its emphasis (...) on practical reason and the philosophy of action. Hence, it is not surprising that among phenomenologists, Paul Ricoeur would.. (shrink)
In this essay I consider the normative implications of the notion of reasonability for the construction of an idea of public reason that is cosmopolitan in scope. First, I consider the argument for the distinction between reason and reasonability in the work of Sibley and Rawls. Second, I evaluate the normative implications of reasonability through a consideration of Korsgaard's recent work. Third, I argue for a notion of reasonability that moves us beyond a Kantian concept of autonomy through a consideration (...) of the relationship between reasonability and judgment vis-à-vis Arendt's work on Kant's Third Critique. Finally, I argue for a cosmopolitan appropriation of the notion of reasonability based on Kant's notion of the aesthetic idea. The latter argument relaxes the bonds of public reason, moving us beyond the domain of ethnocentricism. (shrink)
This is the first systematic assessment of the work of Jürgen Habermas - the key theorist of the later Frankfurt School, whose writing has had a major impact on social theory and sociology. These four volumes comprise the key secondary literature on Habermas. Edited by David Rasmussen and James Swindal, leading commentators on Habermas's work, this will be the standard reference work on one of the canonical theorists of the 20th century. VOLUME ONE: THE FOUNDATIONS OF HABERMAS'S PROJECT Habermas as (...) a Critical Theorist \ Habermas, Hermeneutics and Critical Theory \ The Modernity/Postmodernity Debate VOLUME TWO:LAW AND POLITICS Law and Democratic Theory \ The Public Sphere \ Culture and Society VOLUME THREE: ETHICS Discourse Ethics \ Rethinking Discourse Ethics \ Autonomy and Authenticity VOLUME FOUR: COMMUNICATIVE RATIONALITY, FORMAL PRAGMATICS, SPEECH ACT THEORY AND TRUTH Communicative Rationality \ Formal Pragmatics and Speech Act Theory \ Nature, History and the Logic of Development \ Truth. (shrink)
Gregory R. Johnson and David Rasmussen defend their critique of Ayn Rand's views on abortion, arguing that their critics miss its main points. Tibor Machan and Alexander Tabarrok actually depart from Rand's own position under the guise of defending it; they introduce a non-Randian distinction between being a human organism and being a moral person.
GREGORY R. JOHNSON and DAVID RASMUSSEN argue that Rand's defense of abortion on demand is inconsistent with her own fundamental metaphysical, epistemological, and moral principles, namely that everything that exists has a determinate identity, that the concept of man refers to all of man's characteristics, not just his essential characteristics, and that there is no gap between what an organism truly is and what it ought to be.
“Business Ethics and Postmodernism: A Response” considers the contribution of Ronald Green, David Schmidt, Clarence Walton, RonDuska, and Richard Neilsen to a special issue of Business Ethics Quarterly entitled “Business Ethics and Postmodernism.” This essay poses a fundamental question: to what extent can a position which characterizes itself as postmodern be ethical? The paper argues on philosophical grounds that the debate between modernity and postmodernity is a debate over the very possibility of an ethic. The paper concludes that although Jacque (...) Derrida has made the most convincing argument for an ethic within postmodernity, it remains skeptical because such an argument simply presupposes assumptions which owe their origin to modernity. (shrink)