Advertisement

Ethical Theory and Moral Practice

, Volume 18, Issue 3, pp 549–564 | Cite as

Value Pluralism, Diversity and Liberalism

  • George Crowder
Article

Few would disagree that contemporary society is characterized by ‘pluralism’, but what this means is widely disputed. Among the many senses of pluralism current in contemporary political theory, ‘value pluralism’ is one of the most keenly contested. The classic account is found in Isaiah Berlin, who sees basic human values as irreducibly multiple, often conflicting, and sometimes incommensurable with one another.1 Berlin seems in general to have believed that the pluralist outlook has an affinity of some sort with liberalism, although he does not make it clear what this affinity is.

Other value pluralists, such as John Gray and John Kekes, have tried to sever pluralism from liberalism, instead proposing connections between pluralism and forms of conservatism or modus vivendi. In Kekes’s view, the true message of pluralism is that choice among rival incommensurable goods can be resolved rationally only by appeal to the relevant society’s established traditions (Kekes 1993, 1997). A...

Keywords

Isaiah Berlin Value pluralism Diversity Liberalism 

Notes

Acknowledgments

I am grateful to the editor and two anonymous readers for their stimulating and helpful comments.

References

  1. Berlin I (1975) The end of the ideal of a perfect society, radio broadcast transcribed in the Isaiah Berlin Virtual Library, ed. Hardy H. http://berlin.wolf.ox.ac.uk/
  2. Berlin I (1990) The pursuit of the ideal. In: The crooked timber of humanity: chapters in the history of ideas, ed. Hardy H. John Murray, LondonGoogle Scholar
  3. Berlin I (2000) My intellectual path. In: The power of ideas, ed. Hardy H. London: Chatto & WindusGoogle Scholar
  4. Berlin I (2002) Liberty, ed. Hardy H. Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  5. Berlin I, Polanowska-Sygulska B (2006) Unfinished dialogue. Prometheus Books, AmherstGoogle Scholar
  6. Chang R (ed) (1997) Incommensurability, incomparability, and practical reasoning. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  7. Crowder G (2002) Liberalism and value pluralism. Continuum, LondonGoogle Scholar
  8. Crowder G (2004) Isaiah Berlin: liberty and pluralism. Polity, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  9. Crowder G (2007) Two concepts of liberal pluralism. Polit Theory 35:121–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Crowder G (2013) Theories of multiculturalism: an introduction. Polity, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  11. Dworkin R (1984) Rights as trumps. In: Waldron J (ed) Theories of rights. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  12. Fukuyama F (1992) The end of history and the last man. Penguin, LondonGoogle Scholar
  13. Galston W (2002) Liberal pluralism: the implications of value pluralism for political theory and practice. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Galston W (2005) The practice of liberal pluralism. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  15. Gray, J (1995a) Berlin, London: HarperCollinsGoogle Scholar
  16. Gray J (1995b) Enlightenment’s wake. Routledge, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gray J (2000) Two faces of liberalism. Polity, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  18. Green TH (1991) Liberal legislation and freedom of contract. In: Miller D (ed) Liberty. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  19. Griffin J (1997) Incommensurability: what’s the problem? In: Chang R (ed) Incommensurability, incomparability, and practical reasoning. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  20. Hampshire S (1989) Innocence and experience. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  21. Hampshire S (2000) Justice is conflict. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  22. Kekes J (1993) The morality of pluralism. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  23. Kekes J (1997) Against liberalism. Cornell University Press, IthacaGoogle Scholar
  24. Mill JS (1974 [1859]) On liberty, ed. Gertrude Himmelfarb, Harmondsworth, PenguinGoogle Scholar
  25. Montesquieu, Charles de Secondat, baron de (1748 [1949]) The spirit of the laws, trans. Thomas Nugent, New York: HafnerGoogle Scholar
  26. Moore M (2009) Pluralism, relativism and liberalism. Polit Res Q 62:244–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Neal P (2009) The path between value pluralism and liberal political order: questioning the connection. San Diego Law Rev 46:859–882Google Scholar
  28. Nozick R (1974) Anarchy State and Utopia. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. Nussbaum M (1992) Love’s knowledge: essays on philosophy and literature. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  30. Nussbaum M (2000) Women and moral development: the capabilities approach. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Parekh B (2006) Rethinking and multiculturalism: cultural diversity political theory, 2nd edn. Palgrave, LondonGoogle Scholar
  32. Parfit D (1984) Reasons and persons. Clarendon, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  33. Rawls J (1971) A theory of justice. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  34. Rawls J (1993) Political liberalism. Columbia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  35. Raz J (1986) The morality of freedom. Clarendon, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  36. Riley J (2001) Interpreting Berlin’s liberalism. Am Polit Sci Rev 95:283–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Riley J (2002) Defending cultural pluralism: within liberal limits. Pol Theory 30:68–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Riley J (2012) Isaiah Berlin’s “minimum of moral ground”. Polit Theory 41:61–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Stocker M (1990) Plural and conflicting values. Clarendon, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  40. Taylor C (1994) The politics of recognition. In: Gutmann A (ed) Multiculturalism: examining the politics of recognition. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  41. Turnbull C (1973) The mountain people. Jonathan Cape, LondonGoogle Scholar
  42. Waldron, J (2014) Isaiah Berlin’s neglect of enlightenment constitutionalism, http://ssrn.com/abstract=2410388. Accessed 25 March 2014
  43. Walzer M (1983) Spheres of justice: a defence of pluralism and equality. Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  44. Weber M (1948) Politics as a vocation. In: Gerth H, Wright Mills C (eds) From Max Weber. Kegan Paul, LondonGoogle Scholar
  45. Williams B (1980) Introduction to Berlin I Concepts and categories, ed. Hardy H. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  46. Zakaras A (2013) A liberal pluralism: Isaiah Berlin and John Stuart Mill. Rev Polit 75:69–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Social and Policy StudiesFlinders UniversityAdelaideAustralia

Personalised recommendations