@article{ART001822456},
author={Maeng, Jooman},
title={Sandel and the Republican Public Philosophy},
journal={Philosophical Investigation},
issn={1598-7213},
year={2013},
volume={34},
pages={65-94},
doi={10.33156/philos.2013.34..003}
TY - JOUR
AU - Maeng, Jooman
TI - Sandel and the Republican Public Philosophy
JO - Philosophical Investigation
PY - 2013
VL - 34
IS - null
PB - Institute of philosophy in Chung-Ang Univ.
SP - 65
EP - 94
SN - 1598-7213
AB - Sandel maintains that democracy’s discontent, as he says, is caused by the loss of self-government and the erosion of community which have suffered from the limits of the liberalistic public philosophy by which we live. The central idea of the liberal political theory here is that government should be neutral toward the moral and religious views its citizen espouse. This Kantian liberalism consist of three main thesis, the priority of individual rights, the ideal of neutrality, and the conception of persons as freely choosing, unencumbered selves.
This paper aims to focus on the problems of Sandel’s republican public philosophy which criticizes the limits of Kantian liberalism, including Rawls’ political liberalism and the minimalist liberalism. Sandel’s republican political theory contrasts with the liberalism of the procedural republic in at least two respects. The first concerns the relation of the right to the good; the second, the relation of liberty to self-government. Republicanism affirms a politics of the common good, and the republican sees liberty as internally connected to self-government and the civic virtues that sustain it. Sandel deals with the abortion debate and the Lincoln-Douglas debates in order to make a diagnosis of pending political issues which expose the limits of liberalism, and show that his republican alternatives are right.
In this paper I argue two things. One thing, in spite of the limits of Rawls’ liberalist publc philosophy, I will argue that Sandel’s republican public philosophy cannot offer an alternative resolution because it has serious problems like leaving individual rights vulnerable to the tyranny of the majority, dominant civic virtue or the powerful person having it, etc. The other thing, in spite of its more than a few inner problems, I will argue that Kantian liberalism still holds through something like the comprehensive liberalism confronting directly about moral problems.
KW - Sandel;Rawls;Kant;republican public philosophy;liberal public philosophy;Kantian liberalism;minimalist liberalism;political liberalism;republicanism;liberalism;civic republic;procedural republic;the abortion debate;the Lincoln- Douglas debates
DO - 10.33156/philos.2013.34..003
ER -
Maeng, Jooman. (2013). Sandel and the Republican Public Philosophy. Philosophical Investigation, 34, 65-94.
Maeng, Jooman. 2013, "Sandel and the Republican Public Philosophy", Philosophical Investigation, vol.34, pp.65-94. Available from: doi:10.33156/philos.2013.34..003
Maeng, Jooman "Sandel and the Republican Public Philosophy" Philosophical Investigation 34 pp.65-94 (2013) : 65.
Maeng, Jooman. Sandel and the Republican Public Philosophy. 2013; 34 65-94. Available from: doi:10.33156/philos.2013.34..003
Maeng, Jooman. "Sandel and the Republican Public Philosophy" Philosophical Investigation 34(2013) : 65-94.doi: 10.33156/philos.2013.34..003
Maeng, Jooman. Sandel and the Republican Public Philosophy. Philosophical Investigation, 34, 65-94. doi: 10.33156/philos.2013.34..003
Maeng, Jooman. Sandel and the Republican Public Philosophy. Philosophical Investigation. 2013; 34 65-94. doi: 10.33156/philos.2013.34..003
Maeng, Jooman. Sandel and the Republican Public Philosophy. 2013; 34 65-94. Available from: doi:10.33156/philos.2013.34..003
Maeng, Jooman. "Sandel and the Republican Public Philosophy" Philosophical Investigation 34(2013) : 65-94.doi: 10.33156/philos.2013.34..003
