Overlapping Consensus or Marketplace of Religions? Rawls and Smith
Tóm tắt
In this paper, I examine the claim that Rawls’s overlapping consensus is too narrow to allow most mainstream religions’ participation in political discourse. I do so by asking whether religious exclusion is a consequence of belief or action, using conversion as a paradigm case. After concluding that this objection to Rawls is, in fact, defensible, and that the overlapping consensus excludes both religious belief and action, I examine an alternative approach to managing religious pluralism as presented by Adam Smith. I show that Smith’s so-called “marketplace of religions” assumes and encourages religious conversion. I then offer objections to Smith’s approach from Rawls’s point of view, concluding that, while Rawls cannot adequately respond to the Smithian challenge, in the end the two positions are complimentary.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Barry, B. (1993). “Good For Us, But Not For Them,” The Guardian (p. 23). London: Guardian Newspapers Limited.
Buchanan, J. W. (1976). “The justice of natural liberty” Legal studies, pp. 1-16.
Dworkin, R. (1984). Liberalisms. In M. Sandel (Ed.), Liberalism and its critics (pp. 60–70). New York: New York University Press.
Fleischacker, S. (1999). A third concept of liberty. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Galston, W. (1991). Liberal purposes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gaskin, J. C. A. (1993). “Hume on religion” The Cambridge companion to hume (pp. 480–514). Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.
Griswold, C. L., Jr. (1999). Adam Smith and the virtues of enlightenment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hanley, R. P. (2010). Scepticism and naturalism in Adam Smith. In V. Brown & S. Fleischacker (Eds.), The philosophy of Adam Smith (The Adam Smith Review volume 5) (pp. 198–212). New York: Routledge.
Heirich, M. (1978). Change of Heart. The American Journal of Sociology, 83, 653–680.
Hershovitz, S. (2000). A Mere Modus Vivendi? In V. Davion & C. Wolf (Eds.), The idea of political liberalism (pp. 221–230). New York: Rowman and Littlefield.
Khalil, E. L. (1998). Is justice the primary feature of the state? Adam Smith’s Critique of Social Contract Theory. European Journal of Law and Economics, 6, 215–230.
Montes, L. (2004). Adam Smith in Context. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
Otteson, J. (2002). Adam Smith’s Marketplace of Life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Rawls, J. (1993). Political liberalism. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Rawls, J. (2001a). “The idea of public reason revisited”, The laws of peoples. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Rawls, J. (2001b). Justice as fairness: A restatement. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Rawls, J. (2001c). The laws of peoples. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Rawls, J. (2009). On my religion. In T. Nagel (Ed.), A brief inquiry into the meaning of sin & faith. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Richardson, J. T. (1985). The active vs. passive convert. Journal for Scientific Study of Religion, 24, 163–179.
Schwartzman, M. (December 10, 2010). The ethics of reasoning from conjecture. Journal of Moral Philosophy, forthcoming; Virginia Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper No. 2011-02. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1730340.
Smith, A. (1976). In R. H. Campbell & A. S. Skinner (Eds.), An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations, 2 vols. Indianapolis: Liberty Press.
Smith, A. (1982). In A. L. Macfie & D. D. Raphael (Eds.), Theory of moral sentiments. Indianapolis: Liberty Press.
Snow, D. A., & Machalek, R. (1983). The convert as social type. In R. Collins (Ed.), Sociological theory (pp. 259–289). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Snow, D. A., & Machalek. (1984). The sociology of conversion. American Review of Sociology, 10, 167–190.
Steinberger, P. (2000). The Impossibility of a ‘Political’ Conception. The Journal of Politics, 62(1), 147–165.
von Villez, C. (2006). Double standard – naturally! Smith and Rawls: a comparison of methods. In L. Montes & E. Schliesser (Eds.), New voices on Adam Smith (pp. 115–139). New York: Routledge.
Weinstein, J. R. (1997). Adam Smith and the Problem of Neutrality in Liberal Theory. Ann Arbor: UMI.
Weinstein, J. R. (2004). Review: James W Otteson’s ‘Adam Smith’s Marketplace of Life. Mind, 113(449), 202–207.
Weinstein, J. R. (2006). Sympathy, difference, and education: social unity in the work of Adam Smith. Economics and Philosophy, 22(1), 79–111.
Weinstein, J. R. (2007). Adam Smith’s Philosophy of Education. The Adam Smith Review, 3, 51–74.
Weinstein, J. R. (forthcoming). Adam Smith’s pluralism. New Haven: Yale.