Inquiry and Virtue: A Pragmatist‐Liberal Argument for Civic Education

Abstract

Liberal democracy and virtue have an uncomfortable relationship. The republican tradition ranging from the ancient world through the Atlantic tradition of the Founding Fathers, to present-day communitarians, argues that democracy relies uniquely on the virtue of its citizens. They hold that republics are not defeated from without, but corrupted from within. There is a dire need for a shared conception of the good life. Only then are citizens willing to act together and to make the sacrifices necessary for the common weal. Liberals, however, argue that a shared conception of the good life can be bought only at the price of freedom. Within a nation-state of our size and possessing our level of freedom, differing images of the good life are inevitable and worth respecting. Therefore, the state should not craft souls, but provide the conditions for all to flourish according to their own desired ends. Liberals are not tolerant of all forms of life. Moral doctrines, communities, and traditions that do not accept liberal values of tolerance, respect, liberty, equality, and free inquiry do not have a place in the liberal public sphere (although anti-liberal beliefs may be retained in one’s private life). However, liberals are in a uniquely difficult position because, while they may possess deeply held commitments regarding the need for openness, courage, or respect in a good life, part of that life includes not imposing their image of a good life on others. Liberals must find reasons for coercing fellow citizens that do not require a prior “conversion” to liberalism. They must find impartial reasons for their partiality. More sardonically, Robert Frost defined a liberal as someone “too broadminded to take his own side in a quarrel.” The contest between liberalism and virtue is particularly heated in the area of public education. Because public education is coerced, both by requiring attendance by the young and by taxation of adults, it is a test case for liberalism. Seemingly, public schools must refrain from imposing an image of human excellence on children of disparate faiths and traditions since the state sanctions those who do not comply. Take the example of California’s recent mandate that the historical contribution of homosexuals be included in the curriculum.As a liberal, it is possible to believe not only that toleration and respect of homosexual citizens are inherently good and necessary for the health of our democracy, but also that imposing these virtues through a coercive system of education is intolerant and disrespectful since it violates the right of illiberal parents to raise their children bs_bs_banner