Page 131 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 131 of 166 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
129
Chapter 5: Beyond Homogenization: Protecting Difference and Social Cohesion
In his essay “Toleration: An Impossible Virtue?” Bernard Williams has suggested various ways in which toleration can be achieved as a practice. He also concludes that “it will be all the clearer – clearer than it is if one concentrates on the very special case of the United States – that the practice of toleration has to be sustained not so much by a pure principle resting on a value of autonomy as by a wider and more mixed range of resources.” Williams does not spell out what it is that makes the United States a special case. What comes to mind though is the First Amendment that marks off the separation of religion and state. There is also the fact that the United States is an immigrant society and has a long history of diversity.
Historically, the need for toleration as a practice arose in the wake of the religious wars in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries in Europe. Locke’s Letter on Toleration (1689) was the first attempt to theorize the question. In the Letter, he argues forcefully for a separation of religion and state: “I esteem it above all things necessary to distinguish the business of civil government and that of religion and to settle the just bounds between the one and the other.” The framers of the U.S. Constitution, largely inspired by Locke, laid down in the First Amendment that Congress should not make any law establishing any religion or prohibiting the free exercise of religion. This principle enshrines freedom of worship as well as the separation of religion and state.
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 131 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 129 Chapter 5: Beyond Homogenization: Protecting Difference and Social Cohesion In his essay “Toleration: An Impossible Virtue?” Bernard Williams has suggested various ways in which toleration can be achieved as a practice. He also concludes that “it will be all the clearer – clearer than it is if one concentrates on the very special case of the United States – that the practice of toleration has to be sustained not so much by a pure principle resting on a value of autonomy as by a wider and more mixed range of resources.” Williams does not spell out what it is that makes the United States a special case. What comes to mind though is the First Amendment that marks off the separation of religion and state. There is also the fact that the United States is an immigrant society and has a long history of diversity. Historically, the need for toleration as a practice arose in the wake of the religious wars in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries in Europe. Locke’s Letter on Toleration (1689) was the first attempt to theorize the question. In the Letter, he argues forcefully for a separation of religion and state: “I esteem it above all things necessary to distinguish the business of civil government and that of religion and to settle the just bounds between the one and the other.” The framers of the U.S. Constitution, largely inspired by Locke, laid down in the First Amendment that Congress should not make any law establishing any religion or prohibiting the free exercise of religion. This principle enshrines freedom of worship as well as the separation of religion and state. |
