Abstracts
Résumé
Cet article explore les conséquences pour le libéralisme politique de considérer l’existence d’un pluralisme raisonnable au sujet des différentes conceptions du juste. Comment une conception publique de la justice peut se développer malgré un désaccord raisonnable et profond sur les termes mêmes de cette justice ? En comparant le libertarisme, la justice comme équité et l’égalitarisme strict, il sera montré que les concepts fondamentaux de ces conceptions du juste sont essentiellement contestés. En guise de solution, deux conditions seront suggérées afin de faire en sorte que la conception publique de la justice en soit une de tolérance politique : premièrement, elle devra se baser sur une liste de droits minimaux reconnus par les différentes conceptions raisonnables du juste; et deuxièmement, si la conception publique de la justice a pour ambition de se développer au-delà du dénominateur commun, elle devra offrir des mesures compensatoires à ceux supportant des conceptions du juste plus restrictives. À certains égards, cette problématique et ces accommodements s’apparentent à ce qui est déjà proposé au sujet de multiculturalisme.
Abstract
This paper explores the implications for political liberalism of acknowledging that there is a reasonable disagreement among competing conceptions of justice. How can a public conception of justice be designed while still respecting the views of those who strongly disagree with it ? By confronting libertarianism, justice as fairness, and strict egalitarianism, it will be claimed that the core concepts of theses theories are essentially contested. As a solution, two conditions will be suggested in order for the public conception of justice to be one of political toleration: first, it ought to be based on shared agreements with regards to minimal rights; secondly, if it wishes to go beyond that minimal baseline, those who support more restrictive conceptions should receive some compensation. In some aspects, this issue and its accommodations resemble the ones faced in the multicultural contexts.
Appendices
Bibliographie
- Bohman, James (1995). “Public Reason and Cultural Pluralism: Political Liberalism and the Problem of Moral Conflict”. Political Theory 23 (2): 253–279.
- Carter, Ian (2012). “Positive and Negative Liberty”. In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. Edward N. Zalta. Spring 2012. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2012/entries/liberty-positive-negative/.
- Cohen, Andrew Jason (2004). “What Toleration Is”. Ethics 115 (1): 68-95.
- Cohen, G. A. (1990). “Equality of What? On Welfare, Goods and Capabilities”. Recherches Économiques de Louvain / Louvain Economic Review 56 (3/4): 357-382.
- Collier, David, Fernando Daniel Hidalgo, et Andra Olivia Maciuceanu (2006). “Essentially Contested concepts: Debates and Applications”. Journal of Political Ideologies 11 (3): 211-246.
- Daniels, Norman (1990). “Equality of What: Welfare, Resources, or Capabilities?” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 50: 273-296.
- Gallie, W. B. (1955). “Essentially Contested Concepts”. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 56 (1): 167–198.
- Galston, William A. (2002). Liberal Pluralism: The Implications of Value Pluralism for Political Theory and Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Gosepath, Stefan (2011). “Equality”. In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. Edward N. Zalta. Spring 2011. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2011/entries/equality/.
- Gray, John (1978). “On Liberty, Liberalism and Essential Contestability”. British Journal of Political Science 8 (04): 385-402.
- Gray, John N. (1977). “On the Contestability of Social and Political Concepts”. Political Theory 5 (3): 331-348.
- Macedo, Stephen (1995). “Liberal Civic Education and Religious Fundamentalism: The Case of God v. John Rawls?” Ethics 105 (3): 468-496.
- Nozick, Robert (1974). Anarchy, State, and Utopia. New York: Basic Books.
- Rawls, John (1985). “Justice as Fairness: Political not Metaphysical”. Philosophy & Public Affairs 14 (3): 223-251.
- Rawls, John (2005). Political Liberalism: Expanded Edition. New York, Columbia University Press. 1st ed 1993.
- Sen, Amartya K. (1980). “Equality of What?”. In McMurrin (ed.), Tanner Lectures on Human Values, vol.1., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Vallentyne, Peter (2012). “Libertarianism”. In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. Edward N. Zalta. Spring 2012. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2012/entries/libertarianism/.
- Wenar, Leif (2012). “John Rawls”. In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. Edward N. Zalta. Winter 2012. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2012/entries/rawls/.