Toleration and Pragmatism: Themes from The Work of John Horton.

Philosophia (Ramat-Gan, Israel) Pub Date : 2017-01-01 Epub Date: 2016-11-05 DOI:10.1007/s11406-016-9767-y
Sorin Baiasu
{"title":"Toleration and Pragmatism: Themes from The Work of John Horton.","authors":"Sorin Baiasu","doi":"10.1007/s11406-016-9767-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>John Horton's work has been particularly influential in debates on specific topics related to toleration, political obligation, modus vivendi and political realism. More recently, he has synthesised these views in the form of a distinctive position in political philosophy, a position that has the potential to question much of the received wisdom in the field. The papers of this special issue engage with some of the most fundamental issues of Horton's account, more exactly, the related issues of toleration and modus vivendi, Horton's account of associative obligations, with a focus on the methodological assumptions which underpin his position more generally, and the metaphysical presuppositions of his account, in particular, the presupposition of contingency. I offer brief presentations of the papers in the special issue and of the ways they link with each other. In the discussion of the papers by Forst, Newey, Jones, Weale and Mendus, the emphasis will be on those arguments which question Horton's position. Horton's paper will then be presented with a focus on possible responses to these challenges. I will conclude with several remarks on an unexpected continuity between Horton's realist view and a view realists usually criticise as idealising, namely, John Rawls's theory of justice as fairness.</p>","PeriodicalId":74436,"journal":{"name":"Philosophia (Ramat-Gan, Israel)","volume":"45 2","pages":"397-413"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s11406-016-9767-y","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophia (Ramat-Gan, Israel)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-016-9767-y","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2016/11/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

John Horton's work has been particularly influential in debates on specific topics related to toleration, political obligation, modus vivendi and political realism. More recently, he has synthesised these views in the form of a distinctive position in political philosophy, a position that has the potential to question much of the received wisdom in the field. The papers of this special issue engage with some of the most fundamental issues of Horton's account, more exactly, the related issues of toleration and modus vivendi, Horton's account of associative obligations, with a focus on the methodological assumptions which underpin his position more generally, and the metaphysical presuppositions of his account, in particular, the presupposition of contingency. I offer brief presentations of the papers in the special issue and of the ways they link with each other. In the discussion of the papers by Forst, Newey, Jones, Weale and Mendus, the emphasis will be on those arguments which question Horton's position. Horton's paper will then be presented with a focus on possible responses to these challenges. I will conclude with several remarks on an unexpected continuity between Horton's realist view and a view realists usually criticise as idealising, namely, John Rawls's theory of justice as fairness.

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
宽容与实用主义:约翰·霍顿作品的主题。
约翰·霍顿的著作在与宽容、政治义务、权宜之计和政治现实主义有关的特定主题的辩论中尤其有影响力。最近,他以一种独特的政治哲学立场的形式综合了这些观点,这种立场有可能对该领域的许多公认智慧提出质疑。本期特刊的论文涉及了霍顿论述中一些最基本的问题,更确切地说,是与宽容和暂时方式相关的问题,霍顿对联想义务的论述,重点关注支撑他的立场的方法论假设,以及他的论述的形而上学前提,特别是偶然性的前提。我将简要介绍特刊上的论文以及它们相互联系的方式。在对福斯特、纽维、琼斯、威尔和门杜斯的论文的讨论中,重点将放在那些质疑霍顿立场的论点上。然后,霍顿的论文将重点介绍应对这些挑战的可能方法。最后,我将对霍顿的现实主义观点和现实主义者通常批评为理想化的观点,即约翰·罗尔斯的正义作为公平的理论之间意想不到的连续性进行评论。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
How AI Systems Can Be Blameworthy. W. Matthews Grant's Dual Sources Account and Ultimate Responsibility. Taxation in the COVID-19 Pandemic: to Pay or Not to Pay. The Value of Knowledge and Other Epistemic Standings: A Case for Epistemic Pluralism. The Conditional Analysis of the Agentive Modals: a Reply to Mandelkern et al.
×
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