新兴主义视角下罗尔斯的政治自由主义

IF 0.1 0 PHILOSOPHY
Charles Lowney
{"title":"新兴主义视角下罗尔斯的政治自由主义","authors":"Charles Lowney","doi":"10.5840/traddisc202349319","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"John Rawls’s political liberalism is supported and better understood via Michael Polanyi’s tacit and emergent structures. Rawls claims the political is “freestanding” and “neutral” relative to comprehensive moral doctrines and metaphysical assumptions. Polanyian critics of Rawls empha­size the personal nature of our political commitments and Polanyi’s metaphysical realism. They also claim tacit knowing makes Rawls’s “veil of ignorance” impossible. However, as an emergent social order, political liberalism is a joint comprehension of a plurality of competing traditions that operates as an upper-level control in a dual control system; it supports yet constrains individuals in traditions so they may mutually flourish under its umbrella. Emergent levels have their own rules of organization and hence possess a rationality that can function independently and neutrally relative to its subsidiaries and so is freestanding, as Rawls claims. Still, since this level is constituted by overlapping consensus and is not a modus vivendi, there is indeed personal commitment to political values, as Polanyi affirms. This continuity makes it difficult to disambiguate one’s comprehensive ethical understanding from one’s political understanding. But, as with counterfactual hypotheses in science, Polanyi could endorse the artifice of the veil. By occluding politically irrelevant facts we better access this shared level, and tacit convictions about political justice become explicit.","PeriodicalId":53861,"journal":{"name":"Tradition & Discovery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rawls’s Political Liberalism from an Emergentist Perspective\",\"authors\":\"Charles Lowney\",\"doi\":\"10.5840/traddisc202349319\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"John Rawls’s political liberalism is supported and better understood via Michael Polanyi’s tacit and emergent structures. Rawls claims the political is “freestanding” and “neutral” relative to comprehensive moral doctrines and metaphysical assumptions. Polanyian critics of Rawls empha­size the personal nature of our political commitments and Polanyi’s metaphysical realism. They also claim tacit knowing makes Rawls’s “veil of ignorance” impossible. However, as an emergent social order, political liberalism is a joint comprehension of a plurality of competing traditions that operates as an upper-level control in a dual control system; it supports yet constrains individuals in traditions so they may mutually flourish under its umbrella. Emergent levels have their own rules of organization and hence possess a rationality that can function independently and neutrally relative to its subsidiaries and so is freestanding, as Rawls claims. Still, since this level is constituted by overlapping consensus and is not a modus vivendi, there is indeed personal commitment to political values, as Polanyi affirms. This continuity makes it difficult to disambiguate one’s comprehensive ethical understanding from one’s political understanding. But, as with counterfactual hypotheses in science, Polanyi could endorse the artifice of the veil. By occluding politically irrelevant facts we better access this shared level, and tacit convictions about political justice become explicit.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53861,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Tradition & Discovery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Tradition & Discovery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5840/traddisc202349319\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tradition & Discovery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5840/traddisc202349319","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

约翰·罗尔斯的政治自由主义得到了迈克尔·波兰尼的隐性和新兴结构的支持和更好的理解。罗尔斯主张,相对于全面的道德学说和形而上学假设,政治是“独立的”和“中立的”。波兰对罗尔斯的批评强调我们政治承诺的个人本质和波兰尼的形而上学现实主义。他们还声称,隐性知识使罗尔斯的“无知之幕”成为不可能。然而,作为一种新兴的社会秩序,政治自由主义是对多重竞争传统的共同理解,在双重控制体系中作为一种上层控制运作;它在传统中既支持个人,又限制个人,这样他们就可以在它的保护伞下相互繁荣。如罗尔斯所言,涌现层次有其自身的组织规则,因此具有一种相对于其附属机构可以独立、中立地运作的合理性,因此是独立的。然而,由于这一层次是由重叠的共识构成的,并不是一种权宜之计,正如波兰尼所肯定的那样,确实存在对政治价值观的个人承诺。这种连续性使得人们很难将全面的伦理理解与政治理解区分开来。但是,就像科学中的反事实假设一样,波兰尼可以认可面纱的技巧。通过屏蔽与政治无关的事实,我们可以更好地进入这个共享的层面,关于政治正义的隐性信念变得明确。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Rawls’s Political Liberalism from an Emergentist Perspective
John Rawls’s political liberalism is supported and better understood via Michael Polanyi’s tacit and emergent structures. Rawls claims the political is “freestanding” and “neutral” relative to comprehensive moral doctrines and metaphysical assumptions. Polanyian critics of Rawls empha­size the personal nature of our political commitments and Polanyi’s metaphysical realism. They also claim tacit knowing makes Rawls’s “veil of ignorance” impossible. However, as an emergent social order, political liberalism is a joint comprehension of a plurality of competing traditions that operates as an upper-level control in a dual control system; it supports yet constrains individuals in traditions so they may mutually flourish under its umbrella. Emergent levels have their own rules of organization and hence possess a rationality that can function independently and neutrally relative to its subsidiaries and so is freestanding, as Rawls claims. Still, since this level is constituted by overlapping consensus and is not a modus vivendi, there is indeed personal commitment to political values, as Polanyi affirms. This continuity makes it difficult to disambiguate one’s comprehensive ethical understanding from one’s political understanding. But, as with counterfactual hypotheses in science, Polanyi could endorse the artifice of the veil. By occluding politically irrelevant facts we better access this shared level, and tacit convictions about political justice become explicit.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Tradition & Discovery
Tradition & Discovery PHILOSOPHY-
自引率
50.00%
发文量
6
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信