Understanding Reciprocity and the Importance of Civic Friendship

Catarina Neves
{"title":"Understanding Reciprocity and the Importance of Civic Friendship","authors":"Catarina Neves","doi":"10.1007/s11158-023-09614-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article aims to contribute to the existing literature on the virtues and challenges of political liberalism. It argues that the principle of reciprocity can only sustain political agreement under pluralism, if citizens share a relationship of civic friends, based on mutual recognition as equals (Lister in Anal Kritik 2011, pp. 91–112), a non-prudential concern for the interest of others (Leland and van Wietmarschen in J Moral Philos 14, 2017, pp. 142–167) and shared experiences that can foster interpersonal trust. Inasmuch as this thicker definition of civic friendship is sound, and breeds a successful ground for civic reciprocity, it is argued that this renders the concept of civic reciprocity culturally sensitive in at least four ways: how citizens commit to reciprocity, what political values and institutional arrangements they deem reasonable and how they choose to cooperate are all influenced by culture. While this makes the project of multiculturalism more challenging, it does not make it impossible. Rather, it reminds us that while the formal requirement of reciprocity is important, it is a relational value anchored in how citizens relate to one another. Therefore, for multiculturalism to be successful, policies that strengthen ties of civic friendship need to be implemented.","PeriodicalId":45474,"journal":{"name":"Res Publica-A Journal of Moral Legal and Political Philosophy","volume":"94 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Res Publica-A Journal of Moral Legal and Political Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11158-023-09614-2","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract This article aims to contribute to the existing literature on the virtues and challenges of political liberalism. It argues that the principle of reciprocity can only sustain political agreement under pluralism, if citizens share a relationship of civic friends, based on mutual recognition as equals (Lister in Anal Kritik 2011, pp. 91–112), a non-prudential concern for the interest of others (Leland and van Wietmarschen in J Moral Philos 14, 2017, pp. 142–167) and shared experiences that can foster interpersonal trust. Inasmuch as this thicker definition of civic friendship is sound, and breeds a successful ground for civic reciprocity, it is argued that this renders the concept of civic reciprocity culturally sensitive in at least four ways: how citizens commit to reciprocity, what political values and institutional arrangements they deem reasonable and how they choose to cooperate are all influenced by culture. While this makes the project of multiculturalism more challenging, it does not make it impossible. Rather, it reminds us that while the formal requirement of reciprocity is important, it is a relational value anchored in how citizens relate to one another. Therefore, for multiculturalism to be successful, policies that strengthen ties of civic friendship need to be implemented.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
理解互惠和公民友谊的重要性
本文旨在对政治自由主义的优点和挑战的现有文献做出贡献。它认为,互惠原则只有在多元主义下才能维持政治协议,前提是公民共享一种基于平等相互承认的公民朋友关系(Lister in Anal Kritik 2011, pp. 91-112),对他人利益的非审慎关注(Leland和van Wietmarschen in J Moral Philos 14, 2017, pp. 142-167),以及可以促进人际信任的共享经验。由于公民友谊的这个更厚的定义是合理的,并且为公民互惠培育了一个成功的基础,因此有人认为,这使得公民互惠的概念在至少四个方面具有文化敏感性:公民如何承诺互惠,他们认为合理的政治价值观和制度安排以及他们如何选择合作都受到文化的影响。虽然这使得多元文化主义的项目更具挑战性,但它并不是不可能的。相反,它提醒我们,虽然互惠的正式要求很重要,但它是一种关系价值,根植于公民之间的关系。因此,要使多元文化主义取得成功,就必须实施加强公民友谊纽带的政策。
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: Res Publica: a Journal of Legal, Moral and Social Philosophy is an interdisciplinary publication concerned with the philosophical analysis of moral, political, social and legal issues. It provides a forum for discussion of theoretical issues; a public arena for voicing matters of practical concern; and a vehicle for addressing questions of morality, politics, law and society, the interconnections between them and, more generally, the relation of theory to practice. The journal seeks to publish articles and review essays which are both philosophically rigorous and accessible to a wide range of academics and professionals. Replies to articles are welcome. It is the policy of Res Publica to encourage publication by researchers at the beginning of their careers as well as by established scholars; and by those in non-Western countries.
期刊最新文献
The Promise of Representative Democracy: Deliberative Responsiveness Domination and Freedom: Quality, not Quantity* Which Elections? A Dilemma for Proponents of the Duty to Vote Blaming Reasonable Wrongdoers On a Columnar Self: Two Senses of Expressing Partisanship
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1