1

Rawls (II). Liberalismul politic şi teoria

raţiunii publice - critici

„... the approach requires a form of moral

schizophrenia, or better, a form of multiple personality
disorder. Justification is bifurcated: we keep a tally or ledger
of reasons appropriate for justification in the public domain,
and then we have a separate ledger of reasons we can use in a
broader moral domain. We are divided in double bookkeepers
for moral purposes. What kind of moral integrity is there if we
keep two sets of moral books?”
Norman Daniels – Justice and
justification
 2

Ce avem de discutat:

• Political Liberalism (1993, 1996) – noi concepte faţă de TJ (1971)

• Noul val de dezbateri:

▫ Liberalismul cuprinzător
▫ Democraţia deliberativă
 3
TJ PL

Scopul/logica teorie universală/sistematică ...

unei teorii despre o societate dreaptă
normative (dezirabilitatea) şi stabilă
(fezabilitatea)
(cum trebuie să arate instituțiile)
Asumpţiile: 2 interese fundamentale,
2 proprietăţi fundamentale ale
individului (rational – rezonabil)
+
Teorie a legitimității democratice
(cum trebuie să arate procesele care
dau naștere instituțiilor)
...
+
„reasonable pluralism”;

Instrumentele contractul; ...

conceptuale ideea de procedură; +
poziţia originară şi vălul concepţie politică vs. doctrină
ignoranţei; cuprinzătoare;
strategia maximin, “overlapping consensus”;
ideea echilibrului reflectiv, „political, not metaphysical”;
structura de bază; dreptate – legitimitate;
drept-bine
Produsul cele două principii → constituţie ...
→ legi → decizie +
politică/judecătorească (JaF) Teoria ratiunii publice
 4

Legitimitatea democratică

• D. agregativă – D. Deliberativă:
agregare prin vot a preferințelor – deliberare plus vot
• Valoarea D.: intrinsecă – instrumentală
• De ce D.?
Competiție a elitelor (Schumpeter)
Control al birocrațiilor în creștere (Tullock – Buchanan)
Libertate (negativă) – consimțământ (contractualiști –
Waldron)
Libertate (ca participare politică) (Pettit, republicanismul
contemporan)
Egalitate politică
Justificare publică – D. deliberativă
 5

Liberalismul politic

• Pluralismul concepţiilor despre bine (“reasonable pluralism”)

• Justice as fairness – political, not metaphysical
“...the political conception is a module, an essential constituent part, that fits
into and can be supported by various reasonable comprehensive doctrines that
endure in the society regulated by it”
• Concepţie politică vs. Doctrină cuprinzătoare
• Consensul parţial (“overlapping consensus”)
• Raţional şi rezonabil → reciprocitate
• Nu modus vivendi!
• Metoda de evitare
 6

Raţiunea publică
Locul raţiunii publice – public political forum vs. Background culture
„it is imperative to realize that the idea of public reason does not apply to all
political discussions of fundamental questions, but only to those questions in
what I refer to as the public political forum”
Ideea raţiunii publice
“it is a view about the kinds of reasons on which citizens are to rest their
political cases in making their political justifications to one another when they
support laws and policies that invoke the coercive powers of government
concerning fundamental political questions”
Principiul legitimităţii liberale
„Thus when, on constitutional essentials or matter of basic justice, all
appropriate government officials act from and follow public reason, and when
all reasonable citizens think of themselves ideally as if they were legislators
following public reason, the legal enactement expressing the opinion of the
majority is legitimate law. It may not be thought as the most reasonable, or the
most appropriate, by each, but it is politically (morally) binding on him or her
as citizen and is to be accepted as such”
 7

“...moral schizophrenia” (?)

• Diviziunea muncii morale: Justice as fairness – Legitimacy

• Justificare: dreptatea ca echitate

(substanţialism - adevăr moral – just)
• Legitimare/motivare: raţiunea publică
(proceduralism – rezonabilitate – legitim)

• Clauza raţiunii publice (problema religiei în spațiul public)

“reasonable comprehensive doctrines, religious or nonreligious, may be
introduced in public political discussion at any time, provided that in due
course proper political reasons – and not reasons given by comprehensive
doctrines – are presented that are sufficient to support whatever the
comprehensive doctrines introduced are said to support”

• Nesupunerea civică
 8

Noile critici
• Liberalismul cuprinzător (Barry 1995, Larmore 1999, Raz 1990)
Problema indeterminării/scepticismului
Fără o bază morală → nu mai mult decât un modus vivendi
Dreptate sau consens?
O psihologie morală nerealistă – “monahismul epistemic”
• Democraţia deliberativă (Habermas 1995, 1996, Dryzek 2000,
Gutmann, Thompson 1996)
Constituţia încremenită
Because the citizens cannot conceive of the constitution as a project, the public
use of reason does not actually have the significance of a present exercise of
political autonomy but merely promotes the nonviolent preservation of
political stability.” (Habermas 1995)
Libertatea anticilor şi cea a modernilor – co-originare
Relativizarea normelor construite intersubiectiv
 9
Recomandări de lectură:

Barry, Brian (1995) “John Rawls and the Search for Stability” Ethics Vol. 105, No. 4
Dryzek, John (2000) Deliberative Democracy and Beyond, Oxford University Press
Galston, William (1995) “Two Concepts of Liberalism”, Ethics, Vol. 105, No. 3
Gaus, Gerald F. (1999) “Reasonable Pluralism and the Domain of the Political: How the
Weaknesses of John Rawls’ s Political Liberalism Can be Overcome by a Justificatory
Liberalism”, Inquiry, no 42
Gutmann, Amy, Thompson, Dennis (1996) Democracy and Disagreement, Harvard
University Press, Cambridge – London
Habermas, Juergen (1995) “Recociliation Through the Public Use of Reason : Remarks
on John Rawls’s Political Liberalism” , The Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 92, No. 3
Hampton, Jean (1989) “Should Political Philosophy Be Done Without Metaphysics?”
Ethics, Vol. 99, No. 4
Larmore, Charles (1999) “The Moral Basis of Political Liberalism”, The Journal of
Philosophy, vol. 96, no. 12
Rawls, John (1996) Political Liberalism, Columbia University Press, New York
Raz, Joseph (1990) “Facing Diversity: The Case of Epistemic Abstinence”, Philosophy
and Public Affairs, Vol. 19, No. 1
Scanlon, T.M. (2003) “Rawls on Justification”, in The Cambridge Companion to Rawls,
(edited by Samuel Freeman) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press