Page 80 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 80 of 166 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
77
toleration in his essay “Toleration, An Impossible Virtue.”(Williams, 1996, 26) This phenomenon is also known as globalization and is the subject of much controversy. I refer to this phenomenon because today, issues of pluralism and toleration arise in the context of globalization and increased migrations of populations. It is worth briefly considering the nature of this interdependence of economies and the effects that it may have on conflicts between groups within a given society.
I would like to make it clear that I do not endorse the view that globalization is an unmixed blessing. It is not only the protesters at Seattle who question the global economic order because it exacerbates existing inequalities. The philosopher Thomas Pogge believes that supporters of globalization such as the Economist erroneously report growth in terms of gross domestic product (GDP) instead of gross national income (GNI). The Economist, in response to the Seattle protests, published two charts, one of which showed that if one considered population size, then the poor also benefited from growth. Pogge, in a recent article published in Dissent argues that if one looks at the per capita GNI of the richest and poorest countries, and the ratio between the two, inequality has increased.
In terms of the more appropriate GNI measure, the developing countries, and the poorest of them especially, have not participated proportionately in global economic growth in the globalization period. In fact the distance between the richest and poorest countries has more than doubled, to a staggering 122:1 ratio. (“Growth and Inequality: Understanding Recent Trends,” Dissent, Winter 2008)
Object Description
| Title | Negotiating pluralism and tribalism in liberal democratic societies |
| Author | Sadagopan, Shoba |
| Author email | sadagopa@usc.edu; shobasadagopan@gmail.com |
| Degree | Doctor of Philosophy |
| Document type | Dissertation |
| Degree program | Philosophy |
| School | College of Letters, Arts and Sciences |
| Date defended/completed | 2008-08-22 |
| Date submitted | 2008 |
| Restricted until | Unrestricted |
| Date published | 2008-10-15 |
| Advisor (committee chair) | Lloyd, Sharon |
| Advisor (committee member) |
Dreher, John Keating, Gregory |
| Abstract | My aim in this dissertation is to enquire whether toleration as a practice is achievable. It is prior to the question of how it can be grounded as a virtue. I argue that in liberal democratic societies where there are struggles for recognition on the part of ethnocultural groups, it is possible to negotiate pluralism and tribalism in a way that a stable pluralist society can be maintained. My core thesis rests on a theory of interdependence based both on a theory of human nature and on the material fact of globalization. Insofar as we affirm our nature as human beings engaged in productive activity with other human beings, insofar as we value a world that facilitates that activity, toleration is desirable. It is achievable because with globalization there is a tendency towards homogenization that erodes cultural differences. There is less reason for conflict because what we have in common, our interdependence, goes far deeper than culture. A further sufficient condition may be found in well thought-out policies that are executed through education and dialogue. |
| Keyword | toleration; value pluralism; liberalism; cultural homogenization; globalization; common citizenship |
| Language | English |
| Part of collection | University of Southern California dissertations and theses |
| Publisher (of the original version) | University of Southern California |
| Place of publication (of the original version) | Los Angeles, California |
| Publisher (of the digital version) | University of Southern California. Libraries |
| Provenance | Electronically uploaded by the author |
| Type | texts |
| Legacy record ID | usctheses-m1658 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Rights | Sadagopan, Shoba |
| Repository name | Libraries, University of Southern California |
| Repository address | Los Angeles, California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Filename | etd-Sadagopan-2395 |
| Archival file | uscthesesreloadpub_Volume26/etd-Sadagopan-2395.pdf |
Description
| Title | Page 80 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 77 toleration in his essay “Toleration, An Impossible Virtue.”(Williams, 1996, 26) This phenomenon is also known as globalization and is the subject of much controversy. I refer to this phenomenon because today, issues of pluralism and toleration arise in the context of globalization and increased migrations of populations. It is worth briefly considering the nature of this interdependence of economies and the effects that it may have on conflicts between groups within a given society. I would like to make it clear that I do not endorse the view that globalization is an unmixed blessing. It is not only the protesters at Seattle who question the global economic order because it exacerbates existing inequalities. The philosopher Thomas Pogge believes that supporters of globalization such as the Economist erroneously report growth in terms of gross domestic product (GDP) instead of gross national income (GNI). The Economist, in response to the Seattle protests, published two charts, one of which showed that if one considered population size, then the poor also benefited from growth. Pogge, in a recent article published in Dissent argues that if one looks at the per capita GNI of the richest and poorest countries, and the ratio between the two, inequality has increased. In terms of the more appropriate GNI measure, the developing countries, and the poorest of them especially, have not participated proportionately in global economic growth in the globalization period. In fact the distance between the richest and poorest countries has more than doubled, to a staggering 122:1 ratio. (“Growth and Inequality: Understanding Recent Trends,” Dissent, Winter 2008) |
