Advertisement

Public Reason

  • Dorothea BaurEmail author
Chapter
First Online:
  • 640 Downloads
Part of the Issues in Business Ethics book series (IBET, volume 36)

Abstract

We need a conception of public reason that specifies what can be put forward by NGOs as political actors in the postnational constellation vis-à-vis corporations. A plea is made for a conception of public reason which promotes an unconstrained public dialogue. The background against which to assess public reason is the “fact of reasonable pluralism” (Rawls), i.e. the assumption that modern societies are characterized by the lack of a shared moral view on questions of the good life. It is argued that the liberal restrictions of the content of public reason have a number of implications which make it difficult for NGOs to adopt an emancipatory role as actors in the public sphere, and that liberalism in particular frees the interaction between NGOs and corporations from conforming to the requirements of public reason. Deliberative democracy agrees with feminist thinkers that public reason must be unrestricted since interests of actors must be discursively clarified even if they disagree. Any a priori restriction of what is acknowledged as part of public reason risks to oppress less powerful actors and to exclude them from public debate.

Keywords

Fact of reasonable pluralism Oppression Feminism Unconstrained public dialogue Divided selves Conversational restraints 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Ackerman, B. “Why Dialogue?” The Journal of Philosophy 86 (1) (1989): 5–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Benhabib, S. Situating the Self: Gender, Community and Postmodernism in Contemporary Ethics. Cambridge (UK): Polity Press, 1992.Google Scholar
  3. Benhabib, S. “Toward a Deliberative Model of Legitimacy”. In Democracy and Difference, edited by S. Benhabib, 67–94. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996b.Google Scholar
  4. Benhabib, S. The Claims of Culture: Equality and Diversity in the Global Era. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2002.Google Scholar
  5. Bohman, J. “Public Reason and Cultural Pluralism: Political Liberalism and the Problem of Moral Conflict”. Political Theory 23 (2) (1995): 253–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bohman, J. “Survey Article: The Coming of Age of Deliberative Democracy”. Journal of Political Philosophy 6 (4) (1998): 400–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bohman, J. “Citizenship and Norms of Publicity: Wide Public Reason in Cosmopolitan Societies”. Political Theory 27 (2) (1999): 176–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Charney, E. “Political Liberalism, Deliberative Democracy, and the Public Sphere”. The American Political Science Review 92 (1) (1998): 97–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cohen, J. “Procedure and Substance in Deliberative Democracy”. In Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political, edited by S. Benhabib, 95–109. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  10. Cohen, J.L. “Trust, Voluntary Association and Workable Democracy: The Contemporary American Discourse of Civil Society. In Democracy and Trust, edited by M.E. Warren, 208–48. Cambridge (UK) et al.: Cambridge University Press, 1999b.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cooke, M. “Five Arguments for Deliberative Democracy”. Political Studies 48 (5) (2000): 947–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cortina, A. “The General Public as the Locus of Ethics in Modern Society”. In Facing Public Interest: The Ethical Challenge to Business Policy and Corporate Communications, edited by P. Ulrich and C. Sarasin, 43–58. Dordrecht et al.: Kluwer, 1995.Google Scholar
  13. Dahl, R.A. A Preface to Democratic Theory. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1956.Google Scholar
  14. Dahl, R.A. “Pluralism Revisited”. Comparative Politics 10 (2) (1978): 191–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dryzek, J.S. Deliberative Democracy and Beyond. Liberals, Critics, Contestations. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000.Google Scholar
  16. Forst, R. “The Rule of Reasons. Three Models of Deliberative Democracy”. Ratio Juris 14 (4) (2001): 345–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gaus, G.F. “Reason, Justification, and Consensus: Why Democracy Can’t Have It All”. In Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics, edited by J. Bohman and W. Rehg, 205–42. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1997.Google Scholar
  18. Gaus, G.F. Contemporary Theories of Liberalism: Public Reason as a Post-enlightenment Project. London: Sage, 2003.Google Scholar
  19. Gutmann, A., and D. Thompson. Why Deliberative Democracy? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2004.Google Scholar
  20. Habermas, J. Between Facts and Norms. Cambridge (UK): Polity Press, 1996b.Google Scholar
  21. Horton, J. “Rawls, Public Reason and the Limits of Liberal Justification”. Contemporary Political Theory 2 (1) (2003): 5–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Johnson, J. “Arguing for Deliberation: Some Skeptical Considerations”. In Deliberative Democracy, edited by J. Elster, 161–84. Cambridge (UK) et al.: Cambridge University Press, 1998.Google Scholar
  23. Martí, J.L. “The Epistemic Conception of Deliberative Democracy Defended. Reasons, Rightness and Equal Political Autonomy”. In Deliberative Democracy and Its Discontents, edited by S. Besson and J.L. Martí, 27–56. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2006.Google Scholar
  24. McCarthy, T. “Kantian Constructivism and Reconstructivism: Rawls and Habermas in Dialogue”. Ethics 105 (1) (1994): 44–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Moon, J.D. “Rawls and Habermas on Public Reason: Human Rights and Global Justice”. Annual Review of Political Science 6 (2003): 257–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Palazzo, G. Die Mitte der Demokratie: über die Theorie deliberativer Demokratie von Jürgen Habermas. Baden-Baden: Nomos-Verlags-Gesellschaft, 2002.Google Scholar
  27. Rawls, J. “The Idea of an Overlapping Consensus”. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 7 (1) (1987): 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Rawls, J. Political Liberalism. New York/Chichester: Columbia University Press, 1993.Google Scholar
  29. Rawls, J. “The Idea of Public Reason Revisited”. The University of Chicago Law Review 64 (3) (1997): 765–807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ulrich, P. Integrative Economic Ethics. Foundations of a Civilized Market Economy. Cambridge (UK) et al.: Cambridge University Press, 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Fraser, N. “Rethinking the Public Sphere: A Contribution to the Critique of Actually Existing Democracy”. Social Text (25/26) (1990): 56–80.Google Scholar
  32. Peters, B. “On Public Deliberation and Public Culture”. Reflections on the Public Sphere. InIIS-Arbeitspapier 97 (7). 1997. Accessed November 20, 2006. http://www.iniis.uni-bremen.de/.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of St. Gallen, Institute for Business EthicsSt. GallenSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations

Cite chapter

Buy options