Andere Kunden interessierten sich auch für
![CAN THE MULTITUDE OVERCOME EMPIRE?]( "CAN THE MULTITUDE OVERCOME EMPIRE?")
CAN THE MULTITUDE OVERCOME EMPIRE?32,99 €![Liberalism and the Defence of Political Constructivism]( "Liberalism and the Defence of Political Constructivism")
Liberalism and the Defence of Political Constructivism119,99 €![The Walter Lippmann Colloquium]( "The Walter Lippmann Colloquium")
The Walter Lippmann Colloquium103,99 €![Political Liberalism and Its Internal Critiques:]( "Political Liberalism and Its Internal Critiques:")
Political Liberalism and Its Internal Critiques:38,99 €![Liberalism and the Limits of Power]( "Liberalism and the Limits of Power")
Liberalism and the Limits of Power37,99 €![Liberalism and the Limits of Power]( "Liberalism and the Limits of Power")
Liberalism and the Limits of Power60,99 €![The Possibility of Free Will and Moral Responsibility]( "The Possibility of Free Will and Moral Responsibility")
The Possibility of Free Will and Moral Responsibility15,95 €
I argue that political liberals fail to work out
a unanimous political principle because they avoid
the problem of reasonable disagreement, whether by
way of original position in J. Rawls
or principle of neutrality in C. Larmore, and B.
Ackerman. Political liberals are confronted with a
complicated dilemma when forced to address the
problem of diversity, namely, the dilemma of
excluding or including conceptions of the good that
falsify the original position of neutrality.
In order to address the challenge of reasonable
pluralism, and to overcome the liberal dilemma, I
propose an engaged model for the mutual
understanding of differences as the basis of
reaching political consensus. This model consists of
a procedural presentation of differences in order to
achieve mutual understanding and a rationale for a
common political project. It expands a deliberative
public sphere and opens new possibilities for the
comparative study of political, religious, moral,
and philosophical doctrines that enhance a prospect
of toleration, political consensus and political
justice in pluralistic democratic societies.
a unanimous political principle because they avoid
the problem of reasonable disagreement, whether by
way of original position in J. Rawls
or principle of neutrality in C. Larmore, and B.
Ackerman. Political liberals are confronted with a
complicated dilemma when forced to address the
problem of diversity, namely, the dilemma of
excluding or including conceptions of the good that
falsify the original position of neutrality.
In order to address the challenge of reasonable
pluralism, and to overcome the liberal dilemma, I
propose an engaged model for the mutual
understanding of differences as the basis of
reaching political consensus. This model consists of
a procedural presentation of differences in order to
achieve mutual understanding and a rationale for a
common political project. It expands a deliberative
public sphere and opens new possibilities for the
comparative study of political, religious, moral,
and philosophical doctrines that enhance a prospect
of toleration, political consensus and political
justice in pluralistic democratic societies.