Whose Public Reason? Which Justification of Laws? A Natural Law
Response

J 2021

Whose Public Reason? Which Justification of Laws? A Natural Law Response

BAROŠ, Jiří

Basic information

Original name

Whose Public Reason? Which Justification of Laws? A Natural Law Response

Name in Czech

Čí veřejný rozum? Jaké ospravedlnění zákonů? Odpověď přirozeného práva

Authors

BAROŠ, Jiří (203 Czech Republic, guarantor, belonging to the institution)

Edition

Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale, Paris, Presses Universitaires de France, 2021, 0035-1571

Other information

Language

English

Type of outcome

Článek v odborném periodiku

Field of Study

60300 6.3 Philosophy, Ethics and Religion

Country of publisher

France

Confidentiality degree

není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství

References:

URL

RIV identification code

RIV/00216224:14230/21:00119246

Organization unit

Faculty of Social Studies

DOI

http://dx.doi.org/10.3917/rmm.214.0507

UT WoS

000740975200006

Keywords (in Czech)

liberalismus; neshoda; nová teorie přirozeného práva; perfekcionismus; politický liberalismus; přirozené právo; společné dobro; veřejné ospravedlnění; veřejný rozum

Keywords in English

common good; disagreement; liberalism; new theory of natural law; perfectionism; political liberalism; natural law; public justification; public reason

Abstract

V originále

A persistent puzzle for practical philosophy centres on finding the appropriate path to justify the laws whose purpose is to regulate the functioning of constitutional democracies. Public reason liberals deny that this justification could come from comprehensive doctrines, since the laws must be justifiable to all (reasonable) citizens. The natural law tradition offers a useful test of the plausibility of this claim. This article illustrates how the two versions of public reason liberalism differ in their openness to natural law reasons, and why, given the influence of their disparate starting points on the normative standards by which they assess laws, natural law exponents have good reason to reject both.

Links

GA19-11091S, research and development project

Name: Jak dál s veřejným rozumem? Kritiky a obhajoby veřejného ospravedlnění podle liberalismu

Investor: Czech Science Foundation

Citovat

BAROŠ, Jiří. Whose Public Reason? Which Justification of Laws? A Natural Law Response. Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 2021, vol. 112, No 4, p. 507-524. ISSN 0035-1571. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.3917/rmm.214.0507.

@article{1795878,
   author = {Baroš, Jiří},
   article_location = {Paris},
   article_number = {4},
   doi = {http://dx.doi.org/10.3917/rmm.214.0507},
   keywords = {common good; disagreement; liberalism; new theory of natural law; perfectionism; political liberalism; natural law; public justification; public reason},
   language = {eng},
   issn = {0035-1571},
   journal = {Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale},
   title = {Whose Public Reason? Which Justification of Laws? A Natural Law Response},
   url = {https://www.cairn.info/revue-de-metaphysique-et-de-morale-2021-4-page-507.htm},
   volume = {112},
   year = {2021}
}

TY  - JOUR
ID  - 1795878
AU  - Baroš, Jiří
PY  - 2021
TI  - Whose Public Reason? Which Justification of Laws? A Natural Law Response
JF  - Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale
VL  - 112
IS  - 4
SP  - 507-524
EP  - 507-524
PB  - Presses Universitaires de France
SN  - 00351571
KW  - common good
KW  - disagreement
KW  - liberalism
KW  - new theory of natural law
KW  - perfectionism
KW  - political liberalism
KW  - natural law
KW  - public justification
KW  - public reason
UR  - https://www.cairn.info/revue-de-metaphysique-et-de-morale-2021-4-page-507.htm
N2  - A persistent puzzle for practical philosophy centres on finding the appropriate path to justify the laws whose purpose is to regulate the functioning of constitutional democracies. Public reason liberals deny that this justification could come from comprehensive doctrines, since the laws must be justifiable to all (reasonable) citizens. The natural law tradition offers a useful test of the plausibility of this claim. This article illustrates how the two versions of public reason liberalism differ in their openness to natural law reasons, and why, given the influence of their disparate starting points on the normative standards by which they assess laws, natural law exponents have good reason to reject both.
ER  -

BAROŠ, Jiří. Whose Public Reason? Which Justification of Laws? A Natural Law Response. \textit{Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale}. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 2021, vol.~112, No~4, p.~507-524. ISSN~0035-1571. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.3917/rmm.214.0507.

Detailed Information on Publication Record