Liberalism, Differential Rights and the Value of Community

Dissertation, University of Toronto (Canada) (1999)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

A major preoccupation of late twentieth century political theory is the challenge, posed by the politics of difference, that liberal justice fails to respond to problems faced by minority groups in contemporary liberal societies. This dissertation looks at how liberal justice can respond to this challenge. It is possible to isolate three main considerations which motivate the difference theorists' concern for minority groups: autonomy, identity, and equality. Part One focuses on considerations of identity and autonomy; Part Two addresses issues that arise in relation to equality. ;Considerations of autonomy and identity lead us in different directions. In Part One, I argue that the autonomy approach privileges the personal component of identity---how we define ourselves both in opposition and in relation to others. The identity approach privileges the social aspect of identity---what it means to belong to a group and to share its goals and values. I argue that these two aspects of identity are in fact inextricably linked. It is only by attending to both components of identity that we can appreciate the value of group membership with respect to individual identity. ;If we agree that group membership is essential to identity, it remains to be seen what claims are justified by this interest. Part Two develops an account of which groups matter to individual development. I identify community as the primary locus of individual development. I argue that community maps on to national minorities, ethnic groups, and many other non-ethnic communities. I discuss what claims might be generated by membership in these groups and consider what it means to ensure that people are treated equally with respect to the good of community membership. Addressing these claims requires differential rights, such as self-government and accommodation rights. These rights are motivated by demands for external protections and internal restrictions, which are interrogated in light of the identity approach developed in Part One. My approach allows us to reconcile some internal restrictions with the individual's freedom to develop her identity and disarms the objection to the Identity approach that it subsumes the individual's identity within the group identity

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

    This entry is not archived by us. If you are the author and have permission from the publisher, we recommend that you archive it. Many publishers automatically grant permission to authors to archive pre-prints. By uploading a copy of your work, you will enable us to better index it, making it easier to find.

    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 106,506

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Liberal recognition for identity? Only for particularized ones.Sahar Akhtar - 2011 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 10 (1):66-87.
Genocide and the moral agency of ethnic groups.Karen Kovach - 2006 - Metaphilosophy 37 (3-4):331–352.
Multiculturalism and the challenge of pluralism.Volker Kaul - 2011 - Philosophy and Social Criticism 37 (4):505-516.
Who We Are and What We Do: Ethnicity and Moral Agency.Karen A. Kovach - 2001 - Dissertation, City University of New York
Complex diversity.Jeffrey Hoover - 1999 - Philosophy Today 43 (4):398-410.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-02-04

Downloads
0

6 months
0

Historical graph of downloads

Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references