Democratic Procedures and Liberal Consensus

Klosko, George

doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199270200.001.0001

“…The predicted net effect on tolerance is unclear: while they may bring about an increase due to a greater probability of people meeting and getting to know others who are different, they may also bring about a decrease in tolerance, to the extent that differing groups tend to come into conflict with each other. The two religion variables capture shares of people who belong to a hierarchical religion, and it could be that identification with such a religion tends to decrease tolerance of those who do not follow the dictates of the prelates (Klosko, 2000;Bjørnskov, 2007 Table A1 in the Appendix. Table A2 in the Appendix provides a list of countries included in the analysis.…”

Section: Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Globalization and the transmission of social values: The case of tolerance

Berggren

¹

,

Nilsson

²

2015

Journal of Comparative Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Abstract. Tolerance -respecting those who are different -is arguably of particular importance in an era of globalization, where a potential for economic, social and personal development is increasingly a function of interaction with others different from oneself. We investigate whether globalization induces parents to want to instill tolerance in their children, the main idea being that this would equip the latter for greater success in a more integrated world. We indeed find, using a willingness-to-teach-kids-tolerance measure, that globalization enhances the willingness to transmit such social values. More precisely, economic and social, but not political, globalization has this effect, as shown by using the KOF Index of Globalization in cross-sectional and panel-data regression analyses of up to 66 countries. Addressing potential endogeneity concerns using an instrumental variables approach moreover suggests these relationships to be causal. Overall, our results confirm that certain kinds of globalization seem able to shape values in ways considered desirable by many. Terms of use: Documents in

show abstract

“…Various studies conducted during the preceding fifty years reveal that when push comes to shove, many individuals are publicly willing to declare certain seemingly "reasonable" views (as such are defined by Rawls) to be unacceptable and demand actions which abridge many of the "basic liberties" promoted by Rawlsian political liberalism (Klosko, 1993: 352; see also Klosko, 2000: 42-115). Indeed, it has been calculated that somewhere between 20 percent and 40 percent of the U.S. population, for example, affirms doctrines that would be incompatible with the demands of Rawls' conception (Klosko, 1996: 258-59; see also Klosko 2000). (It is worth noting that 20 percent of the population of the United States translates into approximately 50 million people.)…”

Section: Being Reasonably Rationalmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, as Rawls (for example, 1996: 58) seems to acknowledge, different "reasonable" individuals will affirm different understandings of what constitutes a "reasonable" demand. Indeed, the specific characteristics and demands of "reasonableness" will inevitably be a source of debate and disagreement among citizens, especially in contemporary liberal societies (see, for example, Bohman 1995;Klosko 2000;Neal 1995;and Young 2001). At minimum, "there are, have been, and will be many people (millions and millions!)…”

Section: Separating the Public From The Nonpublicmentioning

confidence: 99%

The (Un)Reasonableness of Rawlsian Rationality

Young¹

2005

South African Journal of Philosophy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT:In Political Liberalism John Rawls argues that "the reasonable" and "the rational" are "two distinct and independent" ideas. This differentiation is essential to the viability of Rawls' conception of political liberalism insofar as it facilitates the recognition and subsequent voluntary acceptance of the need for a public conception of justice that requires all individuals to forsake the unfettered pursuit of their personal ambitions. However, the soundness of Rawls' argument is premised upon a number of questionable claims that, in effect, render his proposed distinction between the reasonable and the rational more chimerical than real, and in so doing critically undermine the ability of his conception of justice to secure the type of voluntary public consensus he deems necessary to establish and sustain a just and stable liberal democracy. It is concluded that the only way one can be assured of generating the sought after conditions is to develop a regulatory framework that publicly supports and protects the principles embodied in Rawls' conception of reasonableness, rather than relying upon the reasonableness of individuals to secure and nourish the required conditions.In Political Liberalism John Rawls (1993: 51) argues that "the reasonable" and "the rational" are "two distinct and independent" ideas. This differentiation is critical to the viability of his conception of political liberalism: It allows him to claim that individuals can effectively distinguish between what is "reasonable" and what is "rational," which, in turn, enables them to recognize the value and, indeed, necessity of adopting and supporting a public conception of justice 1 that requires all individuals to forsake the unfettered pursuit of their personal ambitions. Given the ineliminable diversity of reasonable moral, religious, and philosophical beliefs that characterizes contemporary liberal democracies-that is, the fact of reasonable pluralism-such recognition is essential if Rawlsian political liberalism is to provide for the establishment and preservation of the sociopolitical conditions necessary to secure and sustain a just and stable (in Rawlsian terms, well-ordered) liberal polity.However, the viability of Rawls' argument is premised upon a number of questionable claims that, in effect, render his proposed distinction between the reasonable and the rational more chimerical than real. In particular, when one penetrates the surface of Rawls' argument, it becomes clear that in a society governed by the principles of Rawlsian political liberalism a person's goals and related behavior can be considered genuinely rational only to the extent that they qualify as reasonable. If, as Rawls contends, a person's public behavior must be reasonable if it is to be legitimately accommodated, protected, and facilitated, then maximizing one's potential to achieve her *

show abstract

“…The predicted net effect on tolerance is unclear: while they may bring about an increase due to a greater probability of people meeting and getting to know others who are different, they may also bring about a decrease in tolerance, to the extent that differing groups tend to come into conflict with each other. The two religion variables capture shares of people who belong to a hierarchical religion, and it could be that identification with such a religion tends to decrease tolerance of those who do not follow the dictates of the prelates (Klosko, 2000;Bjørnskov, 2007). The two measures of political and civil rights control for aspects of freedom.…”

Section: Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Globalization and the Transmission of Social Values: The Case of Tolerance

Berggren

¹

,

Nilsson

²

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Abstract. Tolerance -respecting those who are different -is arguably of particular importance in an era of globalization, where a potential for economic, social and personal development is increasingly a function of interaction with others different from oneself. We investigate whether globalization induces parents to want to instill tolerance in their children, the main idea being that this would equip the latter for greater success in a more integrated world. We indeed find, using a willingness-to-teach-kids-tolerance measure, that globalization enhances the willingness to transmit such social values. More precisely, economic and social, but not political, globalization has this effect, as shown by using the KOF Index of Globalization in cross-sectional and panel-data regression analyses of up to 66 countries. Addressing potential endogeneity concerns using an instrumental variables approach moreover suggests these relationships to be causal. Overall, our results confirm that certain kinds of globalization seem able to shape values in ways considered desirable by many. Terms of use: Documents in

show abstract

Democratic Procedures and Liberal Consensus

Cited by 38 publications

References 0 publications

Globalization and the transmission of social values: The case of tolerance

Globalization and the transmission of social values: The case of tolerance

The (Un)Reasonableness of Rawlsian Rationality

Globalization and the Transmission of Social Values: The Case of Tolerance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About