Dialogue sur l'avenir de la democratie liberale: John Rawls,Richard Rorty et Leo Strauss.

详细信息   

• 作者：Boulet ; Paul-Emile.
• 学历：Doctor
• 年：2012
• 导师：Weinstock,Daniel Marc,eadvisorRenaut,Alain,eadvisorNadeau,Christianecommittee memberWeinstock,Daniel Marcecommittee memberRenaut,Alainecommittee memberOgien,Ruwenecommittee memberTanguay,Danielecommittee memberBelanger,Andre J.ecommittee member
• 毕业院校：Universite de Montreal
• Department：Philosophy.
• ISBN：9780494791943
• CBH：NR79194
• Country：Canada
• 语种：English
• FileSize：2089536
• Pages：330

文摘

Our study stems from the awareness that three twentieth-century political philosophies emanating from the United States have not partaken in any serious dialogue,even though this country should be a leader and model of openness regarding the topic of liberal democracy. The three political philosophies in question are those of John Rawls,Richard Rorty and Leo Strauss. Consequently,we have initiated a dialogue by confronting the ideas of these three thinkers on matters concerning truth,history,the dimensions of man,and democratic principles,having furthered this effort by highlighting the opinion of each on eleven classical dualisms related to these four matters. These dualisms are binary oppositions,generally venerable,which classify and divide two orders of reality. Using the common language of classical dualisms allowed us to overcome the obstacles due to the particular language game or vocabulary of each. In the first place,we show that if no real victor emerges from our confrontation,it is possible to judge each of the thinkers according to non contentious criteria (consistency,complexity or subtlety,capacity to refute the other positions). Then we illustrate that the direct confrontation through dialogue allows each of the three positions to express itself on the same issues and leads one to conclusions regarding matters beyond simple exegetic analysis. These conclusions show what kind of compromise is possible between the principles of truth and history. They support the project of resolving the tensions in our understanding of man,in particular,between the public and private spheres. Finally,they remind us of the importance of the ancient view of democratic principles (freedom,equality,justice),if only to counterbalance the current overwhelming trend. Ultimately,we explain how this confrontation can lead to a program for a political philosophy which balances the claims of (premodern) criticism and (modern) confidence,as well as restates the importance of continuing the dialogue in order that our thought be worthy of the idea of liberal democracy.