Civic Friendship Research Articles

The reasons of the unreasonable: Is political liberalism still an option?

In this study, we claim that political liberalism, despite harsh criticism, is still the best option available for providing a just and stable society. However, we maintain that political liberalism needs to be revised so as to be justifiable from the perspective of not only the “reasonable” in a Rawlsian sense (that we define as “fully” reasonable) but also the ones whom Rawls labels as “unreasonable.” To support our claim, going beyond Rawls’s original account, we unpack the concept of unreasonableness and identify three different subsets that we label as the “partially reasonable,” the “non-reasonable,” and the “unreasonable.” We argue that both the “fully” reasonable and the “partially reasonable” would be included into the constituency of public justification; more specifically, we claim that the latter would support liberal institutions out of their reasons: we define these reasons as mutually intelligible reasons and claim that they allow to acknowledge the importance of a convergence approach to public justification. As for the “non-reasonable” and “unreasonable,” we claim that they cannot be included in the constituency of public justification, but they nonetheless could be compliant with liberal institutions if political liberalism offers them some reasons to comply: here, we claim that political liberalism should include them through engagement and propose reasoning from conjecture as an effecting way of offering reasons for compliance. In particular, we claim that through reasoning from conjecture, the “non-reasonable” could find conciliatory reasons to comply with liberal institutions on a stable base. With regard to the “unreasonable” in the strict sense, we claim that through reasoning from conjecture, their unreasonableness could be contained and they could find reasons—even if just self-interested—for complying with liberal institutions rather than defying them. In our discussion, we consider the different subsets not as “frozen” but as dynamic and open to change, and we aim to propose a more complex and multilayered approach to inclusion that would be able to include a wider set of people. To strengthen our argument, we show that the need for a wider public justification and for broader inclusion in liberal societies is grounded in respect for persons both as equal persons and as particular individuals. In particular, we claim that individuals’ values, ends, commitments, and affiliations activate demands of respect and can strengthen the commitment to the liberal–democratic order. Through a reformulation of the role of respect in liberal societies, we also show a kind of social and communitarian dimension that, we claim, is fully compatible with political liberalism and opens it up to “civic friendship” and “social solidarity,” which are constitutive elements for the development of a sense of justice and for the realization of a just and stable society.

Examining the Relationship Between College Students’ Interworldview Friendships and Pluralism Orientation

Background One of the most influential factors shaping college students’ prosocial development—the development of attitudes and behaviors that involve positive engagement within one's community and larger society—is the peer group. Friends have an especially important influence on students’ learning and development because of the time and emotional investment friendship involves. While ample research documents the association between college students’ friendships across racial differences and the development of prosocial attitudes and behaviors, the question of whether friendships across other social boundaries may also do so remains. Purpose This study was guided by the theory of civic friendship, which posits that friendships that cross social boundaries (e.g., religion, race) can foster positive attitudes toward people of other social identity groups and a commitment to justice because of the solidarity and attention to injustice that develop within such relationships. We focused on friendships across the social boundary of worldview identity. More inclusive of secular and spiritual students than “religious identity,” “worldview identity” is defined as a student's guiding life philosophy based on religious, spiritual, and/or non-religious perspective(s). Specifically, the purpose of our study was to examine the relationship between the number of interworldview friendships in the first year on campus and one particular prosocial attitude, pluralism orientation, which reflects acceptance of and active engagement with worldview diversity. Participants We utilized Time 1 and Time 2 data from the Interfaith Diversity Experiences and Attitudes Longitudinal Survey (IDEALS), a national, longitudinal dataset comprised of 7,194 first-year students of diverse racial and worldview identities at 122 U.S. institutions. Research Design We ran a series of blocked multilevel regression models to examine the relationship between the number of interworldview friendships and pluralism orientation at Time 2, controlling for four domains of variables shown in prior literature to also be associated with pluralism orientation. Results Results revealed that, holding constant other predictors, the number of interworldview friendships in the first year on campus is positively associated with pluralism orientation. Conclusions Our results provide additional support for the particularly powerful relationship between friendship across social differences and students’ prosocial development. It is essential, therefore, that colleges and universities create conditions that will help students develop and solidify these vital relationships early in their collegiate journey. By supporting interworldview friendships among their students, colleges and universities are contributing to the creation of a more just and egalitarian society and a stronger democracy.

Society and Sociability in Gabrielle Suchon: Towards a Politics of Friendship

This article aims to examine the treatment of friendship in Gabrielle Suchon's Traité de la morale et la politique (1693) and Du célibat volontaire (1700). In the Traité, friendship is cast in political terms and is represented as the key foundational element of a healthy society. Specifically, a feminization of friendship and a politicization of sociability and conversation allow Suchon to carve out a space for women at the centre of a society founded on egalitarian civic friendship. In Du célibat, Suchon expounds her conception of true friendship, particularly for those who choose a celibate life, and casts freedom as a key constituent element. Through her vision of friendship and conversation as hallmarks of a civil society, Suchon casts her neutralistes within a civil space, constructed and envisaged between the public and private, and so procures for voluntarily celibate women the validity of a space of classical origins.

Equal Respect, Liberty, and Civic Friendship. Why Liberal Public Justification Needs a Dual Understanding of Reciprocity

This paper critically discusses the generally recognized dualism in the interpretation of the moral basis of public reason. We argue that in order to maintain the complementarity of both liberal and democratic values within the debate on public reason, the arguments from liberty and from civic friendship cannot be considered in isolation. With regard to the argument from liberty, we contend that because the idea of natural liberty is an indispensable starting point of liberal theory, no explanation of the justification of political power can do without it. In particular, we focus on the requirement of reasonableness and show that we should retain the epistemic aspect of the reasonableness of persons. Perhaps the main reason for this is to be found in the criterion of reciprocity which provides the deepest justification of the respect for people’s liberty – that is, the liberal aspect of liberal democracy. At the same time, however, we argue that reciprocity also provides the grounds for responding to the criticism that the essentially liberal approach fails to adequately take into consideration the role of political community. Because reciprocity may also be interpreted as being based on civic friendship, it provides the resources to respond to such criticism. It thus supplies the normative background also for the second, democratic pillar of public reason. We then critically examine the newly emerging approach built predominantly on the argument from civic friendship, arguing that by prioritising the civic friendship interpretation and, at times, tending to completely abandon the liberty-based one, it overlooks the indispensability of liberty-based considerations for the criterion of reciprocity. We conclude that in order to adequately capture the common liberal-democratic basis of public reason, both interpretations of reciprocity must be linked within a comprehensive account.

On the Cultivation of Civic Friendship

I examine the possibility of civic friendship to solve the problem of over-doing democracy, paying close attention to how it can counter affective polarization and social homogeneity. In Section I, I explore civic friendship as a solution to polarization. In section II, I argue that Talisse’s civic friendship—in the context of nonpolitical collaboration—is akin to Aristotle’s utility and pleasure-friendships. Given the nature of civic friendship, in Section III–VI I make amendments to Talisse’s proposal. I argue that if civic friendship is to address not only desaturation but polarization, and it has these Aristotelian features, then the cultivation of taste, equity, and ethical attentiveness are necessary.

On the Cultivation of Civic Friendship in advance

On the Cultivation of Civic Friendship in advance

On the Difficulty of Civic Friendship and Unity in an Angry Time

On the Difficulty of Civic Friendship and Unity in an Angry Time

Civic Friendship in America: A Madisonian Retrospective

Given the current and serious political polarization in America, we are compelled to ask whether a nation composed of citizens who disagree so deeply about fundamental principles can endure. Like the classics, America's Founding Father James Madison believed that concord and civic friendship are necessary to the maintenance of a healthy political order. This essay explores Madison's vision of civic friendship in America and asks how the bonds of citizenship might be regenerated in the nation today.

The Ironies of the New Religious Liberty Litigation

The plaintiffs in recent religious liberty litigation are very different from plaintiffs in earlier cases. They are not marginalized or politically powerless. They seek to return the country to its conservative roots, rather than to escape the dominant liberal mindset. But their success has come at a cost to their own deep commitments. This essay will proceed as follows. First, I describe key elements of recent religious liberty cases, highlighting the ways in which they go beyond the older case law that ostensibly served as precedent. Second, I argue that these decisions ironically fall prey to the communitarian critiques of modern liberal democracy that have been prominent in conservative religious circles for thirty years or more. Finally, I sketch a new way forward, drawing on the notion of civic friendship and the Golden Rule, and suggest the question religious believers should be asking now is not “What are our legal rights?” but “What do we owe morally to fellow citizens who believe differently than we do?”

Solidarity and Workplace Engagement: a Management Perspective on Cultivating Community

Solidarity corresponds to virtuous social behavior, including personal freedom and responsibility, civic friendship, benevolence, reciprocity, and cooperation. These attributes are fundamentally good for individual persons and communities of work. Solidarity is therefore vitally important to the practice of humanistic management. This paper aims to provide management insights into the cultivation of solidarity. The paper begins by developing a theoretical framework to understand solidarity in business context, with attention to philosophical and theological connotations. An empirical research model is presented in the form of a survey instrument to test for indications of solidarity in the workplace, and this measure is used to test several hypotheses regarding the positive associations of solidarity with validated measures of workplace engagement. Research results show that it is possible to identify and analyze workplace behaviors associated with solidarity. Data analysis confirms the validity of the model and demonstrates the positive associations of the hypotheses, based on empirical study of 40 workplaces and 399 employees. Moreover, the condition of whether the workplace was a public or private organization was found to affect the main relationship between solidarity and workplace engagement. The paper concludes with suggestions for practicable, tangible workplace behaviors based on the model, offering guidance in the pursuit of humanistic management.

Friendship in a time of protest? Friedrich Schleiermacher and Russel Botman on the fabric of (civic) friendship

Friendship is not often associated with citizenship, politics or civil society – and yet this contribution proposes that civic friendship(s) may be worth consideration as an expression of peacemaking and peacebuilding: the dynamic interplay between our ‘social’ and ‘individual’ selves working towards peace and countering violence. This theological consideration of friendship deals with the interaction between individuality and sociability in the work and thought of a theologian who was deeply interested in such interplay and which may therefore be helpful in theological reflection on friendship. This contribution draws on two theologians who were involved in higher education themselves – the German theologian Friedrich Schleiermacher, who served as rector of the Humboldt University of Berlin (1815–1816), and the South African theologian Russel Botman, who served as rector of Stellenbosch University (2007–2014) – from whom we may learn about (civic) friendship.

Societal Constitutionalism in Japan: Neighbourhood Associations as Micro-relational Constitutional Sites

AbstractOver the past few years, Japan has been witnessing the emergence, regeneration, and spread of micro-relational forms of cohesion, solidarity, and responsibility in response to theryūdō-ka shakaiandhikikomoriphenomena. These terms refer to the crisis of social relations and co-operation, which commenced after the collapse of the Japanese economy in the early 1990s. While scholars, particularly sociologists and anthropologists, have consistently inquired into these micro-sites of civic friendship and responsibility, their juridical status is yet to be ascertained. This article argues that the paradigm of societal constitutionalism developed by Gunther Teubner can be of precious assistance in conducting such an assessment. In particular, it offers a contextualization of Teubner’s reflections on constitutional pluralism and fragmentation of social functions from the perspective of Kiyoshi Hasegawa’s state-centric scholarship on the regulatory dynamics of neighbourhood associations as micro-relational communities in suburban areas. A particular is given, and only given, within relations.1

Civic Friendship, Public Reason

Civic Friendship, Public Reason

Francesco Piccolomini’s Christian-Neoplatonic Reading of Aristotle’s Theory of Friendship

Francesco Piccolomini (1523–1607) interprets Aristotle’s theory of friendship from a Christian-Neoplatonic perspective. This paper focuses on the various (ancient, medieval, and Renaissance) sources of Piccolomini’s interpretation and shows that he succeeds in expounding a coherent doctrine in which the Aristotelian ideal of civic friendship is integrated into a theocentric ethics of spiritual love.

Public reason, civic trust and conclusions of science

Rawlsian idea of public reason refers to the boundaries on political justification of coercive laws and public policies that have wide impact on lives of citizens. The boundaries of public reason means that political justification should be based on reasons we can expect every citizen can reasonably accept independently of any comprehensive religious, philosophical or moral doctrine to which she adhere. In modern liberal democracies characterized by reasonable pluralism of comprehensive doctrines it is unjustified for political argumentation to be based on claims that many citizens can not accept. As I understand it, the point of idea of public reason is to strengthen the relationship of civic trust or civic friendship that can ensure inherent stability of just political regime. An important part of the idea of public reason is how it incorporates scientific claims in political argumentation. Rawls writes that citizens are to base their public justification on „presently accepted general beliefs and forms of reasoning found in common sense, and the methods and conclusions of science when those are not controversial.“ If the idea of public reason is the source of political stability it is necessary to answer what it means that conclusions of science are controversial in political and social context? First, scientific controversy is different from controversy of comprehensive doctrines. Science stands outside of comprehensive doctrines so conclusions of science will not be controversial because they clash with comprehensive beliefs, but they will be controversial if they rely on comprehensive beliefs. Second, if conclusions of science are controversial within scientific community, if there are some expert witness disputing its validity, then maybe value-judgments can enter to set standards for certification of the scientific claim. If potential consequences of scientific claim are bad for welfare of some group in society than standards of evidence that will certify this claim must go up. Finally, even if some scientific claim has been certified it still can be controversial as a premise in political justification. The reason can be that certification has not been transparent and many citizens do not realize that this claim is part of scientific consensus. Again, the criterion for controversy of scientific conclusions in political context is connected to the notion of trust and not to the validity of scientific claim or supportive evidence by itself.

Between Presumption and Despair: Augustine's Hope for the Commonwealth

Many political theorists dismiss Augustine as a pessimist about politics, assuming his “otherworldly” account of love precludes hope for this-worldly politics. This article challenges this pessimism by applying recent research on Augustine's “order of love” to reconstruct his implicit order of hope. Analyzing neglected sermons, letters, and treatises, I argue that Augustine encourages hope for temporal goods as long as that hope is rightly ordered and avoids the corresponding vices of presumption and despair. I then identify “civic peace” as a common object of hope that diverse citizens can share. By recovering hope as a virtue and reframing civic peace as a positive form of civic friendship, I argue that Augustine commends a hope for the commonwealth that avoids both presumption and despair. I conclude by analyzing how Augustine's vision of the commonwealth can inform contemporary political theory and practice.

Citizenship and Inequality: The Case of Jerusalem

Two models of citizenship predominate in Western political thought: the model of ancient warrior and the model of modern producer. Both are traditionally male activities and tend to produce inequalities in society rather than mitigate them. A third model of citizenship exists, reaching back to Aristotle, whose goal is to reduce inequalities and realise a civic friendship among all citizens, but such is generally considered ‘unrealistic’ today. If we consider the theoretically underappreciated ethical reproductive activities of women, however, together with the Gandhian tradition of non-violent civil disobedience, this third model of political action emerges as possible and may be relevant to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict over Jerusalem.

Some Questions on Aristotle's Civic Friendship

Some Questions on Aristotle's Civic Friendship

Internalized Borders: Immigration Ethics in the Age of Trump

The Trump administration’s immigration measures and attendant dehumanizing rhetoric have fanned the flames of nationalism and sown fear in communities. Its internal enforcement strategies are bolstered by manipulative narratives that perpetuate myths and reflect facile analyses of complex dilemmas, focusing on symptoms rather than causes of migration. Reducing immigration questions to the locus of border crossers alone eclipses from view transnational actors responsible for economic instability, violent conflict, or labor recruitment, and also eclipses their accountability. Recent developments in migration ethics help illuminate significant historical and structural contexts of migration as well as models of justice and norms for negotiating duties of reception that better reflect such relationships. Attending to underlying fears and idolatries that contribute to exclusionary dynamics also emerges as critical for advancing just policy reforms and cultivating civic friendship moving forward.

Etyka troski. Wkład teorii feministycznej w myślenie o państwie

The aim of the article is to describe the contribution of the ethics of care, understood as an element of the feminist theory and a philosophical and theoretical discourse, to ref‌lection on the state. Three care ethics proponents are the starting point of this article. Carol Gilligan analyses concepts particularly related to women’s moral development – the value of relations and care which is bound to these concepts. Martha Nussbaum’s political thought focuses on the need to revise the political concept of the person and proposes the inclusion of care into the idea of a just state. Sibyl A. Schwarzenbach conceives civic friendship as a form of public care among equal citizens, which refers to mothers’ care for their children. Each of these authors considers the political model of the state based exclusively on justice to be insuf‌ficient. By introducing the concept of care, they show the importance of dependence and relations among people understood as biological beings. Here arguably lies the hope for developing a more extensive model of political thought than that which is merely based on justice understood as freedom among equals. The care ethics perspective takes account of both inequality (dependence) and relations.