November 17, 2005
A new philosophy weblog I've come across---Philosophy Times run by Roberto. It works in terms of essays. One of these is on Rawl's Political Liberalism, and it opens with the key question of this text: 'how is it possible for there to exist over time a just and stable society of free and equal citizens in the face of reasonable pluralism'? It is a good question to ask when pluralism and multiculturalism is currently under threat from the national security state in its war on terrorism.
The answer is clear:
That is, what are the conditions needed to secure political stability within a democratic society consisting of diverse religious, philosophical, and moral outlooks? Rawls gives the following answer: a just and stable society is possible despite the existence of reasonable pluralism if its basic structure is regulated by a "political conception of justice that is the focus of an overlapping consensus of at least the reasonable comprehensive doctrines affirmed by its citizens."
The categories "political conception of justice", "overlapping consensus", and "reasonable comprehensive doctrines" are then unpacked by Rob.
It is "an overlapping consensus of reasonable comprehensive doctrines" that is being put into question in the war on terrorism being waged by liberal democracies. What has gone is the consensus in the sense of:
"... reasonable people not coercing others to adopt their value-system when they recognize others can reasonably disagree. Furthermore, if one happens to be in a group that is in strong disagreement with the political conception of justice, one is still reasonably expected to accept the political conception of justice not simply because one feels forced to but rather because one has a sense of justice and is motivated to act justly. In short, an overlapping consensus is accepted for moral reasons."
What we have today after 9/11 is a modus vivendi that is accepted for non-moral self-interested reasons. In this situation as soon as one party grows more powerful than the other, they will coerce the weaker group to adopt their comprehensive outlook, whatever that may be.
|