Abstract
John Rawls rejected modus vivendi political outcomes as normatively deficient because he believed that the participants are not motivated by moral reasons. Contemporary defenders of modus vivendi reject the importance of distinguishing between moral and nonmoral reasons for constructing terms of peaceful coexistence. Theorists have highlighted peace and security as values that are integral to a modus vivendi. I argue that the idea of mutuality ought to be included in an account of how a modus vivendi emerges between parties who have opposed views about how to decide jointly a matter of common concern.
A modus vivendi is a compromise, and the creation of a modus vivendi requires the parties to understand themselves as facing a situation to which they ought to respond together. I argue that mutuality is a value that is presupposed in their effort to create a modus vivendi. How and why parties regard each other as having standing to shape the resolution of a political conflict remains unexplored in the literature on modus vivendi. Although parties to a modus vivendi are unlikely to regard each other as deserving equality of standing, they nevertheless recognize each other in a manner that is morally salient. Mutuality involves viewing people whom one opposes or considers to be a rival as nevertheless having standing to participate in a shared political life.
Inquiry into the origin of a shared commitment to mutuality can help scholars understand what conditions facilitate willingness to coexist and to participate in a modus vivendi.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Brown, W. (2015). What is important in theorizing tolerance today? Tolerance as such does not exist. Contemporary Political Theory, 14(2), 159–196.
Cohen, M. A. (2015). Alternative conceptions of generalized trust (and the foundations of the social order). Journal of Social Philosophy, 46(4), 463–478.
Dauenhauer, B. P. (2000). A good word for a modus vivendi. In V. Davion & C. Wolf (Eds.), The idea of a political liberalism: Essays on rawls (pp. 204–220). Lanham, MA: Rowman & Littlefield.
Edyvane, D. (2013). Civic virtue and the sovereignty of evil. New York: Routledge.
Gray, J. (2000). Two faces of liberalism. New York: The New Press.
Gutmann, A., & Thompson, D. (1996). Democracy and disagreement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Gutmann, A., & Thompson, D. (2010). The mindsets of political compromise. Perspectives on Politics, 8(4), 1125–1143.
Gutmann, A., & Thompson, D. (2012). The spirit of compromise: Why governing demands it and campaigning undermines it. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Horton, J. (2006). John Gray and the political theory of modus vivendi. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 9(2), 155–169.
Horton, J. (2010). Realism, liberalism, and a political theory of modus vivendi. European Journal of Political Theory, 9(4), 431–448.
Horton, J. (2011a). Modus vivendi and religious conflict. In M. Mookherjee (Ed.), Democracy, religious pluralism and the liberal dilemma of accommodation (pp. 121–136). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
Horton, J. (2011b). Why the traditional conception of toleration still matters. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 14, 289–305.
Horton, J. (2012). Political legitimacy, justice, and consent. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 15(2), 129–148.
Jones, P. (2017). The political theory of modus vivendi. Philosophia, 45(2), 443–461.
Kühler, M. (2018). Modus vivendi and toleration. In J. Horton, M. Westphal, & U. Willems (Eds.), The political theory of modus vivendi. Heidelberg: Springer.
McCabe, D. (2010). Modus vivendi liberalism: Theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
McCabe, D. (2018). Modus vivendi as a global political morality. In J. Horton, M. Westphal, & U. Willems (Eds.), The political theory of modus vivendi. Heidelberg: Springer.
Menkel-Meadow, C. (2016). Ethics of compromise. In A. Farazmand (Ed.), Global encyclopedia of public administration, public policy, and governance (pp. 1–8). Basel: Springer International Publishing.
Putnam, R. D., Feldstein, L. M., & Cohen, D. J. (2004). Introduction. In R. D. Putnam, L. M. Feldstein, & D. J. Cohen (Eds.), Better together: Restoring the American community (pp. 1–10). New York: Simon and Schuster.
Rawls, J. (1987). The idea of an overlapping consensus. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 7(1), 1–25.
Rawls, J. (1996). Political liberalism. (Expanded ed.). New York: Columbia University Press.
Rossi, E. (2010). Modus vivendi, consensus, and (Realist) liberal legitimacy. Public Reason, 2(2), 21–39.
Rossi, E. (2018). Can modus vivendi save liberalism from moralism? A critical assessment of John Gray’s political realism. In J. Horton, M. Westphal, & U. Willems (Eds.), The political theory of modus vivendi. Heidelberg: Springer.
Weinstock, D. (1999). Building trust in divided societies. The Journal of Political Philosophy, 7(3), 287–307.
Wendt, F. (2013). Peace beyond compromise. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 16(4), 573–593.
Wendt, F. (2016). The moral standing of modus vivendi arrangements. Public Affairs Quarterly, 30(4), 351–370.
Westphal, M. (2018). Institutions of modus vivendi politics. In J. Horton, M. Westphal, & U. Willems (Eds.), The political theory of modus vivendi. Heidelberg: Springer.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Schweitzer, K. (2019). Motives and Modus Vivendi. In: Horton, J., Westphal, M., Willems, U. (eds) The Political Theory of Modus Vivendi. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-79078-7_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-79078-7_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-79077-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-79078-7
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)