The purpose of this study is to seek to an answer to the question of what constitutes a tenable model for global ethics. This is done in part by a critical engagement with four different models of global ethics; two proposals from political philosophy and two contributions from theological ethics. The models analyzed in the study are: (1) the capabilities approach as developed by Martha Nussbaum, (2) Seyla Benhabib’s discourse ethics and model of cosmopolitan federalism, (3) David Hollenbach’s model of the common good and human rights, and (4) the model for responsibility ethics and theological humanism as developed by William Schweiker. These models contain different understandings of global justice, human rights, and sustainable development. The study works with six primary problems: (1) Which are the main moral problems associated with different processes of globalization? (2) What should be the response to these problems, in the form of a normative ethical model? (3) What is the relation between global ethics and universalism? (4) What kind of institutional vision for the international arena does a tenable global ethic promote? (5) Given the human diversity and global pluralism, what would be a reasonable view of the human being included in a global ethic? (6) What kind of ethical theory is sustainable for global ethical reflection? These questions also form the basis for the analysis of the models. The study uses a set of criteria in order to assess the answers that the models offer for these questions. These criteria also constitute the framework within which the author’s contribution to the discussion of global ethics is phrased. The criteria are founded on an idea of what characterizes global ethical reflection. The contention is that a tenable global ethic should be relevant, and it should also be related to a reasonable view of human beings and a plausible ethical theory. Together these support the criterion of communicability, which argues that a global ethic should above all be communicable, i.e. capable of enabling cross-cultural communication. A central argument which this study makes is that a kind of ethical contextualism is more reasonable than an epistemological universalism.

In 1988, Linda Nicholson and Nancy Fraser published an article entitled "Social Criticism Without Philosophy: An Encounter Between Feminism and Postmodernism," arguing that this essay would provide a jumping point for discussion between feminisms and postmodernisms within academia. Within this essay, Nicholson and Fraser largely disavow a number of second wave feminist theories due to their essentialist and foundationalist underpinnings in favor of a set of postmodernist frameworks that might help feminist theorists overcome these epistemological impediments. A "postmodern feminism," Nicholson and Fraser claim, would become "the theoretical counterpart of a broader, richer, more complex, and multilayered solidarity, the sort of solidarity which is essential for overcoming the oppression of women" (35). Interpreting "Social Criticism" through a feminist cultural studies model in which texts are understood to be simultaneously constituted by and reflective of their own sociopolitical spaces, I argue that the construction of Nicholson and Fraser's "postmodern feminism" is, first and foremost, neither a postmodernist critique nor a means of overcoming the pitfalls of essentialism and foundationalism. Instead, the construction of this theoretical paradigm can be shown to be complicit with postfeminist discourses, wherein an implicitly patriarchal discourse of postmodernism is called upon to repair the deficiencies of feminisms, deficiencies that postmodernisms, in some ways, helped to bring into view. To provide a conceptual backing for these claims, I move toward an examination of mass culture, surveying the similarities between "Social Criticism" and the film What Women Want. Such a comparison, I suggest, facilitates a better understanding of how "Social Criticism" can be shown to be imbedded in a postfeminist narrative structure in which feminisms are relegated to a discursively subordinate gendered position in relation to postmodernisms. Finally, in what I find to be the most important aspect of this thesis' inquiry, I ask what it means to build a "broader, richer, more complex, and multilayered solidarity" by disavowing second wave feminisms in favor of postmodernisms. I conclude that, in using postmodernisms as a panacea for feminist theories, Nicholson and Fraser curtail what might have been a rigorous interrogation of and direct engagement with second wave feminist theories that would also attend to the phallogocentric underpinnings of postmodern theories. To underline the potential consequences, I turn to a set of televisual and filmic texts including Sex and the City, Desperate Housewives, and The Devil Wears Prada to gauge what their "postmodern feminism" might represent in practice rather than what it entails as philosophy. This juxtaposition of these two differently defined and yet overwhelmingly similar postmodern feminisms, I propose, underscores the potential that Nicholson and Fraser may have instituted a postmodern feminist methodology in which it is possible that feminisms might emerge not as discourses essential for "overcoming the oppression of women" but rather as discourses that can be critiqued into oblivion.

In this thesis, I seek to answer the question of what constitutes a tenable form of sexual citizenship for lesbian-, bisexual- and gay citizens by deploying two models of citizenship which have permeated scholarly and public discourse: the “liberal” and the “republican” model. This is done in conjunction with critical engagement with two political philosophers, and their conceptualization of citizenship. They are (1) The capabilities approach by Martha Nussbaum and (2) cosmopolitan federalism as presented by Seyla Benhabib. This thesis uses three primary questions: (1) On what basis are members of the polity chosen? (2) On what basis are the members of the polity able to participate politically? (3) How does the conceptualized model of citizenship account for social- and civil rights pertaining to sexual difference? These questions furthermore establish the basis for the analysis of the models.  In order to assess the answers that the different model provide, this thesis utilizes two analytic variables articulated in terms of lack of rights and disenfranchisement which will throughout this thesis act as underpinnings. These variables are predicated on reflecting two mechanisms of exclusions of lesbigay citizens, the claim being that the rejoinders to them are used to assess and constitute to a tenable sexual citizenship.

Post-colonial feminisms have questioned the concept of a universal sisterhood for decades. One of its critics is Chandra Talpade Mohanty (1955–), an Indian-American, post-colonial feminist theorist. In her work, Mohanty suggests that the concept of a universal sisterhood occludes variations in women’s experiences of oppression and ways of life. She criticizes western feminism for casting third world women as objects in their own lives rather than subjects. Instead, Mohanty suggests an international solidarity between groups of women from different circumstances, where women’s various experiences are taken into account. The present study aims to examine the possibility of a trans-contextual feminist ethic based on the questions posed by Mohanty’s work in her book Feminism Without Borders. Since Mohanty is no ethicist, the study will also use resources from the work of Seyla Benhabib (1950–), a Turkish-American philosopher. She places herself in the Kantian tradition and in close relation to Habermas discursive ethics, but she also takes a feminist approach to ethics. This study first evaluates the resources found in Mohanty’s work, which are not enough to construct a basis for a trans-contextual feminist ethics. Thereafter, resources are sought in Benhabib’s works Situating the Self and The Claims of Culture and in her discursive ethics, her views on universalism, her concepts of “the concrete other” and “the generalized other”, and her views on cultures. This examination shows that the resources in the material under scrutiny are not enough to build a basis for a trans-contextual feminist ethic. Questions still remain which might be answered in the wider work of Benhabib or Mohanty, but the material at hand leaves questions about how Mohanty’s vision could be realized in spite of several practical and theoretical problems related to who is associated with which group and the tension between particular experiences and a trans-cultural ethic, none of which are satisfactorily addressed in either Mohanty or Benhabib. In discussing Benhabib, there is also a problem with the two principles of her ethics (i.e. universal respect and egalitarian reciprocity) and their justification. Benhabib herself claims them to be self-explanatory, but this study suggests, with support from other ethicists, that this is not sufficient justification.

Undersökningen syftar till att utforska en postsekulär variant av integrationsbegreppet, genom att kritiskt granska aktuell forskning om integration. Detta genom ett explorativt begreppsstudium som primär metodologisk ansats, ett allmänt litteraturstudium som sekundär ansats, samt ett intersektionellt perspektiv som komplementär teoretisk ansats. Undersökningens postsekulära teoretiska ramverk utgörs av Zygmunt Baumans teori om flytande modernitet, Charles Taylors teori om den dialogiska funktionen, och Seyla Benhabibs teori om deliberativ demokrati. Undersökningen visar på fem centrala dimensioner av det postsekulära integrationsbegreppet; (i) mer än enbart religion, (ii) förändrade maktförhållanden och villkor, (iii) intersektionalitet, (iv) samtida aktivism, och slutligen (v) ideal och visioner. Den första dimensionen syftar till att problematisera den vetenskapliga debatten om postsekularitet, och påpeka dess ensidiga betoning på religion och religiositet i relation till sekulära samhällen. Den andra dimensionen syftar till att undersöka maktförhållanden och villkor, med grund i historiska, ekonomiska, sociala och globala faktorer. En tredje dimension belyser den mänskliga identitetens komplexitet och dess transformation, utifrån maktrelationer och tillhörighetskategorier. Den fjärde dimensionen som trädde fram accentuerade begrepp som deliberativ demokrati, omförhandling, försoning och solidaritet. Fokus lades främst på socialt engagemang och gräsrotsinitiativ som former av aktivism. Den femte och avslutande dimensionen anspelar på idealets och visionernas betydelse, och hur dessa träder fram i samtida sekulär kontext. Med grund i undersökningens resultat, är det möjligt att påvisa hur traditionella förståelser av integrationsbegreppet framträder som otillräckliga och kontraproduktiva i strävan efter jämlik och inkluderande integration. / The purpose of this study is to explore a postsecular alternative to the concept of integration, through a critical examination of current research on integration. This is achieved through an explorative conceptual study as the primary method, a general literature study as the subordinate method, and an intersectional perspective as a complementary theoretical approach. The postsecular theoretical framework of this thesis consists of Zygmunt Bauman’s theory of liquid modernity, Charles Taylor’s theory of the dialogical function, and Seyla Benhabib’s theory of deliberative democracy. The study presents five central features of the postsecular concept of integration as being; (i) more than just religion, (ii) change in power relations and conditions, (iii) intersectionality, (iv) contemporary activism, and lastly (v) ideals and visions. The first feature aims to scrutinize the scientific postsecular debate, and point out its one-sided emphasis on religion and religiosity in relation to secular societies. The second feature aims to examine power relations and conditions, constituted by historical, economic, social and global factors. A third feature illuminates the complexity and transformation of identity, with regards to power relations and categories of belonging. The fourth feature which appeared in the study emphasized concepts like deliberative democracy, renegotiation, reconciliation and solidarity. The focal point being social commitment and grassroots- levels of initiatives as forms of activism. The fifth and concluding feature refers to the significance of ideals and visions and how these appear in contemporary secular context. Based on this study, it is possible to claim how traditional understandings of the concept of integration appear inadequate and counterproductive in the endeavor of an equal and inclusive integration.