Two Misunderstandings About Public Justification and Religious Reasons

Cite This

Files in this item

Files Size Format View

There are no files associated with this item.

BARDON, Aurélia, 2018. Two Misunderstandings About Public Justification and Religious Reasons. In: Law and Philosophy. 37(6), pp. 639-669. ISSN 0167-5249. eISSN 1573-0522. Available under: doi: 10.1007/s10982-018-9330-z

@article{Bardon2018-12Misun-43955, title={Two Misunderstandings About Public Justification and Religious Reasons}, year={2018}, doi={10.1007/s10982-018-9330-z}, number={6}, volume={37}, issn={0167-5249}, journal={Law and Philosophy}, pages={639--669}, author={Bardon, Aurélia} }

<rdf:RDF xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/" xmlns:dspace="http://digital-repositories.org/ontologies/dspace/0.1.0#" xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/" xmlns:void="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" > <rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/rdf/resource/123456789/43955"> <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/> <dcterms:title>Two Misunderstandings About Public Justification and Religious Reasons</dcterms:title> <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2018-11-22T09:27:13Z</dcterms:available> <dcterms:issued>2018-12</dcterms:issued> <dc:contributor>Bardon, Aurélia</dc:contributor> <dc:language>eng</dc:language> <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/jspui"/> <bibo:uri rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/43955"/> <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2018-11-22T09:27:13Z</dc:date> <dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">Two important objections have been raised against exclusivist public reason (EPR). First, it has been argued that EPR entails an unjust burden for citizens who want to appeal to non-public reasons, especially religious reasons. Second, it has been argued that EPR is based on a problematic conception of religious reasons and that it ignores the fact that religious reasons can be public as well. I defend EPR against both objections. I show that the first objection conflates two ideas of public justification (public justification as a conception of political legitimacy and public justification as an ideal of civility) and that the second objection conflates two ways to understand and identify religious reasons. Ultimately, it turns out that those who defend such objections actually share the concerns that justified EPR in the first place. In other words, if we are clear about the idea of public justification and the kind of religious reasons that EPR is really about, it appears that justificatory liberals are in fact all exclusivists.</dcterms:abstract> <dc:creator>Bardon, Aurélia</dc:creator> <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/rdf/resource/123456789/42"/> <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/rdf/resource/123456789/42"/> </rdf:Description> </rdf:RDF>

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Search KOPS


Browse

My Account