Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Moderate Inclusivism and the Conversational Translation Proviso: Revising Habermas' Ethics of Citizenship.Jonas Jakobsen - 2019 - European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 11 (4):87-112.
    Habermas’ ‘ethics of citizenship’ raises a number of relevant concerns about the dangers of a secularistic exclusion of religious contributions to public deliberation, on the one hand, and the dangers of religious conflict and sectarianism in politics, on the other. Agreeing largely with these concerns, the paper identities four problems with Habermas’ approach, and attempts to overcome them: the full exclusion of religious reasons from parliamentary debate; the full inclusion of religious reasons in the informal public sphere; the philosophical distinction (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Consensus, Convergence, Restraint, and Religion.Paul Billingham - 2018 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 15 (3):345-361.
    This essay critically assesses the central claim of Kevin Vallier’s Liberal Politics and Public Faith: that public religious faith and public reason liberalism can be reconciled, because the values underlying public reason liberalism should lead us to endorse the ‘convergence view’, rather than the mainstream consensus view. The convergence view is friendlier to religious faith, because it jettisons the consensus view’s much-criticised ‘duty of restraint’. I present several challenges to Vallier’s claim. Firstly, if Vallier is right to reject the duty (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Religion in the public sphere.Andrew F. Smith - 2014 - Philosophy and Social Criticism 40 (6):535-554.
    Commonplace among deliberative theorists is the view that, when defending preferred laws and policies, citizens should appeal only to reasons they expect others reasonably to accept. This view has been challenged on the grounds that it places an undue burden on religious citizens who feel duty-bound to appeal to religious reasons to justify preferred positions. In response, I develop a conception of democratic deliberation that provides unlimited latitude regarding the sorts of reasons that can be introduced, so long as one (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • In Defense of Moderate Inclusivism: Revisiting Rawls and Habermas on Religion in the Public Sphere.Jonas Jakobsen & Kjersti Fjørtoft - 2018 - Etikk I Praksis - Nordic Journal of Applied Ethics 2:143-157.
    The paper discusses Rawls’ and Habermas’ theories of deliberative democracy, focusing on the question of religious reasons in political discourse. Whereas Rawls as well as Habermas defend a fully inclusivist position on the use of religious reasons in the ‘background culture’ or ‘informal public sphere’, we defend a moderately inclusivist position. Moderate inclusivism welcomes religiously inspired contributions to public debate, but it also makes normative demands on public argumentation beyond the ‘public forum’ or ‘formal public sphere’. In particular, moderate inclusivism (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation