Philosophical Foundations of Contemporary Intolerance: Why We No Longer Take Martin Luther King, Jr. Seriously

IF 0.4 3区社会学 Q4 POLITICAL SCIENCE

Critical Review Pub Date : 2022-01-02 DOI:10.1080/08913811.2022.2030608

A. Preston

引用次数: 2

Abstract

ABSTRACT A growing body of research suggests that political polarization in the United States is at a forty-year high, and that it is rooted less in disagreements over policy than in hostile attitudes toward political opponents. Such attitudes explain the manifest increase of intolerant behavior in American culture and politics in recent years. But what explains the attitudes themselves? One significant contributor may have been the rise of scientism in the early twentieth century, which undermined the metaphysical, epistemic, and institutional foundations of the type of morality required to transcend our instinctual tribalism.

查看原文本刊更多论文

当代不容忍的哲学基础：为什么我们不再认真对待马丁·路德·金

摘要越来越多的研究表明，美国的政治两极分化达到了40年来的最高水平，其根源与其说是政策分歧，不如说是对政治对手的敌对态度。这种态度解释了近年来美国文化和政治中不容忍行为的明显增加。但如何解释这些态度本身呢？一个重要的贡献者可能是二十世纪初科学主义的兴起，它破坏了超越我们本能的部落主义所需的道德类型的形而上学、认识论和制度基础。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Critical Review POLITICAL SCIENCE-

CiteScore

1.30

自引率

12.50%

发文量

期刊介绍： Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society is a political-science journal dedicated to advancing political theory with an epistemological bent. Recurrent questions discussed in our pages include: How can political actors know what they need to know to effect positive social change? What are the sources of political actors’ beliefs? Are these sources reliable? Critical Review is the only journal in which the ideational determinants of political behavior are investigated empirically as well as being assessed for their normative implications. Thus, while normative political theorists are the main contributors to Critical Review, we also publish scholarship on the realities of public opinion, the media, technocratic decision making, ideological reasoning, and other empirical phenomena.