Stout, Rawls, and the idea of public reason
Jeffrey Stout claims that John Rawls's idea of public reason (IPR) has contributed to a Christian backlash against liberalism. This essay argues that those whom Stout calls “antiliberal traditionalists” have misunderstood Rawls in important ways, and goes on to consider Stout's own critiqu...
| Auteur principal: | |
|---|---|
| Type de support: | Numérique/imprimé Article |
| Langue: | Anglais |
| Vérifier la disponibilité: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | En cours de chargement...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Publié: |
Wiley
[2014]
|
| Dans: |
Journal of religious ethics
Année: 2014, Volume: 42, Numéro: 3, Pages: 540-562 |
| Sujets / Chaînes de mots-clés standardisés: | B
Stout, Jeffrey 1950-
/ Rawls, John 1921-2002
/ Raison
/ Public
/ Éthique politique
/ Christianisme
/ Libéralisme
|
| RelBib Classification: | AB Philosophie de la religion CG Christianisme et politique NCD Éthique et politique VA Philosophie |
| Accès en ligne: |
Volltext (doi) |
| Édition parallèle: | Électronique
|
| Résumé: | Jeffrey Stout claims that John Rawls's idea of public reason (IPR) has contributed to a Christian backlash against liberalism. This essay argues that those whom Stout calls “antiliberal traditionalists” have misunderstood Rawls in important ways, and goes on to consider Stout's own critiques of the IPR. While Rawls's idea is often interpreted as a blanket prohibition on religious reasoning outside church and home, the essay will show that the very viability of the IPR depends upon a rich culture of deliberation in which all forms of reasoning can be put forth for consideration. This clarification addresses the perception that the IPR imposes an “asymmetrical burden” upon believers. In fact, the essay suggests that there are good reasons why believers, qua believers, might endorse the IPR. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0384-9694 |
| Contient: | Enthalten in: Journal of religious ethics
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1111/jore.12069 |