The thesis revolves around the transformation of liberal citizenship to a higher degree of conditionality in the face of pluralist challenges revolving around achieving a shared common good. John Rawls’ Political Liberalism serves as the theoretical foundation for the argumentative analysis conducted, utilizing specific civic integration policies of Sweden and Denmark. The normative policy analysis reveals that the “civic integrationist turn” in itself is largely compatible with Rawls’ liberal principles of justice and equality. However, the problematic component lies in the de facto implementation of those measures which can have exclusionary and discriminatory effects i.e. the formulation of citizenship test questions and the portrayal of particular comprehensive doctrines of minority groups as incompatible with national liberal values. The most substantial challenge for a liberal pluralist society remains achieving “overlapping consensus” in the political sphere and guaranteeing safeguards for citizen’s personal comprehensive doctrines in the private sphere.

A democracia é, atualmente, o modelo preeminente de organização e de exercício da autoridade política. No entanto, os regimes políticos democráticos existentes ao redor do mundo nem sempre satisfazem critérios de justiça substantiva. Isto é, a democracia política pode existir, e perdurar ao longo do tempo, mesmo que se verifiquem violações claras de exigências normalmente associadas à justiça política e social. A partir dessa constatação, a questão substantiva desta dissertação é o exame da maneira pela qual considerações de justiça política e social são tratadas pela literatura da teoria democrática. O ponto de partida é o exame da teoria democrática minimalista. A despeito da acurácia e parcimônia analítica dessa teoria, as respostas que ela oferece à questão substantiva aqui examinada podem não ser satisfatórias. Portanto, são analisadas as formas de lidar com a nossa questão substantiva também no campo da teoria política normativa. Nesta análise, a principal alternativa teórica examinada é o liberalismo político de John Rawls, com o objetivo de desvendar em que medida o conteúdo normativo dessa teoria é menos ou mais compatível com as dimensões que são enfatizadas pela teoria democrática minimalista e que a tornam atraente. / Democracy currently is the most prominent model of organization and of exercising political power. However, democratic political regimes existing around the world do not always satisfy criteria of substantive justice. In other words, political democracy may exist and endure for long periods, even alongside with clear violations of requirements normally associated with political and social justice. In the face of this fact, the substantive question of this dissertation is the examination of the way how the literature on democratic theory deals with considerations of political and social justice. The starting point is the examination of the minimalist democratic theory. In spite of the accuracy and analytic parsimony of this theory, its answers to the substantive question, here examined, may not be satisfactory. Therefore, the ways in which the normative political theory deals with our substantive question are also analyzed. In the present analysis, John Rawls political liberalism is the main theoretical alternative examined, according to the objective of discovering in to what extent the normative content of Rawls theory is less or more compatible with the dimensions emphasized by the minimalist democratic theory, and that make it attractive.

Thesis advisor: Stephen Hudson / There has been a growing consensus within political philosophy that liberalism is the most rational form of political organization. The arguments in favor of liberalism are theoretical and also based on historical observations. The view of liberalism as a moral conception of the good life, however, seems to betray its original historical purpose, namely, to provide a peaceful political forum despite competing comprehensive doctrines. How can liberalism be a thick moral conviction of its own if it was meant to temper such zero-sum convictions? To pose this question more concretely: If historic wars between strong religious convictions were tempered by provisional liberal ceasefires, could we accept the evolution of liberalism into a strong conviction of its own? This paradoxical development of liberalism in history runs parallel with contemporary philosophical debates. Whether the most proper conception of liberalism is comprehensive, and whether it is legitimized upon such comprehensiveness are both hotly debated. Exploring these historical and philosophical avenues uncover what I think is a need for a conception of comprehensive liberalism. It is beyond my scope here to formulate a new conception of liberalism that decisively settles the debate. I do, however, point to reasons why comprehensive liberalism should be the focus of contemporary efforts. First, I find that history shows a trend of liberalism growing into a positive doctrine of its own. Second, I invoke two famous traditional conceptions, one successful and one failed, which fuel our baseline intuitions of liberalism with comprehensive, not political justifications. Finally, I show that while contemporary philosophy surrounding liberalism developed a political conception, it cannot avoid slipping towards comprehensiveness. Taken together, my argument is that any enforceable and useful theory of liberalism must be grounded on thick and comprehensive philosophical premises. / Thesis (MA) — Boston College, 2017. / Submitted to: Boston College. Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. / Discipline: Philosophy.

A democracia é, atualmente, o modelo preeminente de organização e de exercício da autoridade política. No entanto, os regimes políticos democráticos existentes ao redor do mundo nem sempre satisfazem critérios de justiça substantiva. Isto é, a democracia política pode existir, e perdurar ao longo do tempo, mesmo que se verifiquem violações claras de exigências normalmente associadas à justiça política e social. A partir dessa constatação, a questão substantiva desta dissertação é o exame da maneira pela qual considerações de justiça política e social são tratadas pela literatura da teoria democrática. O ponto de partida é o exame da teoria democrática minimalista. A despeito da acurácia e parcimônia analítica dessa teoria, as respostas que ela oferece à questão substantiva aqui examinada podem não ser satisfatórias. Portanto, são analisadas as formas de lidar com a nossa questão substantiva também no campo da teoria política normativa. Nesta análise, a principal alternativa teórica examinada é o liberalismo político de John Rawls, com o objetivo de desvendar em que medida o conteúdo normativo dessa teoria é menos ou mais compatível com as dimensões que são enfatizadas pela teoria democrática minimalista e que a tornam atraente. / Democracy currently is the most prominent model of organization and of exercising political power. However, democratic political regimes existing around the world do not always satisfy criteria of substantive justice. In other words, political democracy may exist and endure for long periods, even alongside with clear violations of requirements normally associated with political and social justice. In the face of this fact, the substantive question of this dissertation is the examination of the way how the literature on democratic theory deals with considerations of political and social justice. The starting point is the examination of the minimalist democratic theory. In spite of the accuracy and analytic parsimony of this theory, its answers to the substantive question, here examined, may not be satisfactory. Therefore, the ways in which the normative political theory deals with our substantive question are also analyzed. In the present analysis, John Rawls political liberalism is the main theoretical alternative examined, according to the objective of discovering in to what extent the normative content of Rawls theory is less or more compatible with the dimensions emphasized by the minimalist democratic theory, and that make it attractive.

A tese examina a relação entre justiça e bem nos trabalhos tardios de John Rawls e, em especial, no livro O Liberalismo Político (1991). É argumentado que as mudanças nos trabalhos tardios de Rawls podem ser compreendidas como resultado de uma reorientação em seu pensamento. Rawls redesenhou alguns aspectos de sua filosofia para que ela cumpra um conjunto específico de papéis na cultura política pública das sociedades democráticas. Apesar das mudanças, os trabalhos tardios carregam consigo uma estrutura da relação entre justiça e bem que possui implicações importantes sobre o modo como os cidadãos, ao aceitar princípios políticos liberais, concebem suas doutrinas religiosas, filosóficas e morais a respeito do bem. A tese examina, portanto, como essas mudanças podem ser explicadas como resultado de uma reorientação que carrega consigo consequências relevantes para a relação entre justiça e bem. / This thesis examines the relationship between justice and good in the late works of John Rawls and, especially, in the book Political Liberalism (1991). It is argued that the changes in Rawls\' late work can be understood as as a result of a reorientation in his thinking. Rawls has redesigned some aspects of his philosophy so that it fulfills a specific set of roles in the public political culture of democratic societies. Despite the changes, late work carries with it a structure of the relationship between justice and well which has important implications for the way in which citizens, in accepting liberal political principles, conceive of their religious, philosophical and moral doctrines of good. The thesis examines, therefore, how these changes can be explained as a result of a reorientation that carries with it relevant consequences for the relationship between justice and good.

In this thesis, I defend John Rawls’s assertion that political liberalism does not use the concept of truth. I respond to objections from Joshua Cohen and David Estlund. I argue that Cohen fails to show that public reason needs a minimalist conception of truth, since individuals with a range of conceptions of moral truth can meet the requirements of public reason. I dispute Estlund’s argument that the liberal principle of legitimacy is merely insular. Estlund assumes that the claim that the liberal principle of legitimacy is reasonable is no different than the claim that the principle is acceptable to reasonable persons. I argue that this assumption is incorrect, and that therefore the liberal principle of legitimacy is justifiable on the grounds that it is reasonable. I argue that political liberals need not worry that doing without the concept of truth will undermine the semantic coherence or objectivity of political liberalism.

<p>In this dissertation, I develop a political liberal ethics of citizenship that reconciles conflicting religious and civic obligations concerning political participation and deliberation--a liberal-democratic ethics of citizenship that is compatible with religious integrity. I begin by canvassing the current state of the debate between political liberals and their religious critics, engaging Rawls's Political Liberalism and the various religious objections Nicholas Wolterstorff, Christopher Eberle, Robert George, John Finnis, Paul Weithman, Jeffrey Stout, and Gerald Gaus and Kevin Vallier develop (Chapter One). I then critically evaluate political liberalism's requirements of citizens in light of the religious objections and the religious objections in light of political liberal norms of reciprocity, concluding that some religious citizens have legitimate complaints against citizenship requirements that forbid citizens from offering religious arguments alone in public political discussions (Chapter Two). Next, I propose an alternative set of guidelines for public political discussions in constitutional democracies, the phased account of democratic decision-making, that, I argue, addresses the religious citizens' legitimate complaints without undermining a constitutional democracy's legitimacy or commitment to public justification (Chapter Three). Then, I argue that a religious practice of political engagement I call prophetic witnessing is compatible with the phased account, can serve as a canonical model to guide religious citizens' political participation, and can help religious citizens navigate the substantive conflicts between their religious and civic obligations that remain possible even in a society that follows the phased account (Chapter Four). Finally, I conclude by imagining three different democracies, each adhering to a different set of guidelines for public political discussions, in order to argue for the benefit of adopting norms that balance citizens' obligations to govern themselves legitimately with citizens' ability to integrate their deepest moral and religious commitments and their public, political argument and advocacy.</p> / Dissertation

This paper takes as its starting point the fact of reasonable pluralism and defends political liberalism as the best means of accommodating diversity and a plurality of different conceptions of the good. I then ask what is needed for a social order characterized by diversity and a multiplicity of different ways of life to come into existence and perpetuate itself over time. First, I defend political liberalism and argue that the creation of a society that is accommodating of diversity requires that the state be mindful of the spillover effects between public institutions and the private lives of citizens. Second, I argue that the individuals living in such a society must adopt certain virtues, both publicly as well as privately. I achieve this by presenting an account of the virtues of citizens in a political liberal society. Third, I draw out the implications of having a society characterized by reasonable pluralism and many different conceptions of the good, by arguing that such a society should avoid adopting too expansive a role, since an overly ambitious conception of social justice risks stifling the diversity a political liberal society is trying to protect. I conclude with some general remarks about the current state of liberal theorizing and the need for liberal theorists to provide an account of liberalism that includes more than one’s conception of distributive justice and legitimate state coercion. / Thesis (Master, Philosophy) -- Queen's University, 2008-09-22 21:48:39.206

No description available.

The purpose of this paper is to critically examine Richard Rorty’s arguments in favour of a limited role for religion in the public sphere, both with regard to their practical value and their consistency with Rorty’s other philosophical commitments. A brief description of Rorty’s various philosophical commitments is followed by a detailed analysis of the negative practical consequences that can be foreseen resulting from Rorty’s approach to the topic of religion and any attempt to enforce his proposed treatment of religion. After looking at the practical problems with Rorty’s position, a closer look was taken at Rorty’s consistency across his philosophical writings. With a particular focus on Rorty’s pragmatism and his epistemic relativism the author concludes that Rorty’s arguments for reducing the influence of religion in the public sphere remain of questionable practicality and, furthermore, are at odds with his epistemological commitments. Rorty’s commitment to liberal democracy entails a commitment to protecting citizens’ rights to voice their opinions in hopes of influencing public policy. Despite his controversial writings with regards to the role of religion in society, authors such as Jeffrey Stout and Nicholas Wolterstorff provide alternative approaches to the appropriate treatment of religion in society that remain consistent with an anti-foundational commitment to liberal democracy and can expect to produce more favourable practical outcomes. / Graduate