Faith and the Common Good in the Political Philosophy of John Rawls

2021 ◽  
pp. 37-58
Author(s):  
David A. Reidy
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
John Rawls ◽  
Common Good ◽  
The Political ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
The Common

Love of Glory and the Common Good

1982 ◽  
Vol 76 (4) ◽  
pp. 825-836 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Palmer
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
Common Good ◽  
Political Community ◽  
The Political ◽  
Highest Good ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
Political Problem ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The City

How the city, the political community, may ask its citizens to sacrifice their lives for the sake of its preservation has plagued us since the birth of political philosophy. This article examines Thucydides' presentation of Pericles' attempt to solve this problem by reconciling the highest good of the individual and the good of the city by means of the love of glory. I contrast the central themes of Pericles' speeches in Thucydides, especially his renowned funeral oration, with other parts of Thucydides' presentation of Periclean Athens, in particular his famous account of the plague, to demonstrate his doubts about the efficacy of the Periclean solution to the political problem.

Speaking for Islam

2009 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 110-127
Author(s):  
Abdoulaye Sounaye
Keyword(s):  
Common Good ◽  
The State ◽  
Institutional Transformation ◽  
The Political ◽  
Religious Authority ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
The Common ◽  
Religion And State ◽  
Islamic Values ◽  
French Model

Unexpectedly, one of the marking features of democratization in Niger has been the rise of a variety of Islamic discourses. They focus on the separation between religion and the state and, more precisely, the way it is manifested through the French model of laïcité, which democratization has adopted in Niger. For many Muslim actors, laïcité amounts to a marginalization of Islamic values and a negation of Islam. This article present three voices: the Collaborators, the Moderates, and the Despisers. Each represents a trend that seeks to influence the state’s political and ideological makeup. Although the ulama in general remain critical vis-à-vis the state’s political and institutional transformation, not all of them reject the principle of the separation between religion and state. The Collaborators suggest cooperation between the religious authority and the political one, the Moderates insist on the necessity for governance to accommodate the people’s will and visions, and the Despisers reject the underpinning liberalism that voids religious authority and demand a total re-Islamization. I argue that what is at stake here is less the separation between state and religion than the modality of this separation and its impact on religious authority. The targets, tones, and justifications of the discourses I explore are evidence of the limitations of a democratization project grounded in laïcité. Thus in place of a secular democratization, they propose a conservative democracy based on Islam and its demands for the realization of the common good.

The Politics of Planning

2012 ◽  
pp. 738-758
Author(s):  
J. Phillip Thompson
Keyword(s):  
Social Justice ◽  
Urban Planning ◽  
Built Environment ◽  
Common Good ◽  
Political Reform ◽  
The Political ◽  
Political Aspect ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
The Common ◽  
The City

This article examines the political aspect of urban planning. It discusses Robert Beauregard's opinion that planning should not reject modernism entirely or unconditionally embrace postmodernism, and that planners should instead maintain a focus on the city and the built environment as a way of retaining relevancy and coherence, and should maintain modernism's commitment to political reform and to planning's meditative role within the state, labor, and capital. The article suggests that planners should also advocate utopian social justice visions for cities which are not so far-fetched as to be unrealizable so that planning can then attach itself to widespread values such as democracy, the common good, or equality.

Speaking for Islam

2009 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 110-127
Author(s):  
Abdoulaye Sounaye
Keyword(s):  
Common Good ◽  
The State ◽  
Institutional Transformation ◽  
The Political ◽  
Religious Authority ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
The Common ◽  
Religion And State ◽  
Islamic Values ◽  
French Model

Unexpectedly, one of the marking features of democratization in Niger has been the rise of a variety of Islamic discourses. They focus on the separation between religion and the state and, more precisely, the way it is manifested through the French model of laïcité, which democratization has adopted in Niger. For many Muslim actors, laïcité amounts to a marginalization of Islamic values and a negation of Islam. This article present three voices: the Collaborators, the Moderates, and the Despisers. Each represents a trend that seeks to influence the state’s political and ideological makeup. Although the ulama in general remain critical vis-à-vis the state’s political and institutional transformation, not all of them reject the principle of the separation between religion and state. The Collaborators suggest cooperation between the religious authority and the political one, the Moderates insist on the necessity for governance to accommodate the people’s will and visions, and the Despisers reject the underpinning liberalism that voids religious authority and demand a total re-Islamization. I argue that what is at stake here is less the separation between state and religion than the modality of this separation and its impact on religious authority. The targets, tones, and justifications of the discourses I explore are evidence of the limitations of a democratization project grounded in laïcité. Thus in place of a secular democratization, they propose a conservative democracy based on Islam and its demands for the realization of the common good.

Politics and Virtue: Radical Orthodoxy and Wisdom for the Common Good

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 317-331
Author(s):  
Scott Cowdell
Keyword(s):  
Common Good ◽  
The Political ◽  
Radical Orthodoxy ◽  
Global Capital ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
Economic Liberalism ◽  
John Milbank ◽  
Secular Modernity ◽  
Political Traditions ◽  
The Common

Abstract This article reflects on political virtue in conversation with an influential manifesto from English Radical Orthodoxy: The Politics of Virtue, by John Milbank and Adrian Pabst. They see social and economic liberalism as destroying a sustaining metaphysics of communal abiding, with classical and Judaeo-Christian roots. They commend an ‘alternative modern’ version of this past, albeit through British and European political traditions and arrangements preserving elements of its ‘conservative socialism.’ Yet they undersell the spiritual capacities of secular modernity, also the political virtue of principled, non-ideological pragmatism. And they oversell the actual pacific character of that idealised past, since such closed worlds required the discrete use of violence to maintain order and boundaries. A more mainstream Christian account of political virtue today would see liberal autonomy augmented by a revived communitarianism, along with the civilizing of global capital.

The Individual, The State, and The Common Good

1996 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-79 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Haldane
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
Common Good ◽  
The State ◽  
Aesthetic Theory ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
The Common ◽  
Political Deliberation ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Civil Order

Let me begin with what should be a reassuring thought, and one that may serve as a corrective to presumptions that sometimes characterize political philosophy. The possibility, which Aquinas and Madison are both concerned with, of wise and virtuous political deliberation resulting in beneficial and stable civil order, no more depends upon possession of aphilosophical theory of the state and of the virtues proper to it, than does the possibility of making good paintings depend upon possession of an aesthetic theory of the nature and value of art.

Religious Freedom, Modern Democracy, and the Common Good: Conference Papers

1995 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 565-566
Author(s):  
Philip E. Devenish
Keyword(s):  
John Rawls ◽  
Common Good ◽  
Religious Freedom ◽  
Religion And Politics ◽  
The United States ◽  
Modern Democracy ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
Political Principle ◽  
The Common ◽  
Conference Papers

The papers that follow were presented on April 27, 1996, at a conference entitled “Religious Freedom, Modern Democracy, and the Common Good” and devoted to Franklin I. Gamwell's The Meaning of Religious Freedom: Modern Politics and the Democratic Resolution (Albany: SUNY, 1995). The conference was sponsored by the Lilly Endowment and held at Eden Theological Seminary in St. Louis.Gamwell's constructive proposal is significant not as a further nuance on settled ways of understanding the relation of religion and politics in the United States, but rather as an explicit attempt to unsettle the current consensus in approaching this issue itself. As Gamwell shows, the contemporary discussion is dominated by so-called separationist and religionist understandings that alike assume, rather than argue, that religion is “nonrational.” He engages positions representing the entire spectrum of such understandings, including the “privatist” view of John Rawls, the “partisan” view of John Courtney Murray, and the “pluralist” view of Kent Greenawalt, in order to demonstrate that such a nonrational approach makes it impossible democratically not only to assert, but also to give coherent meaning to the political principle of religious freedom.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document