Public Reason Research Articles

Public reason, Kant, and kantians: comments on Lu-Adler’s Kant on public reason and the linguistic other

Public reason, Kant, and kantians: comments on Lu-Adler’s Kant on public reason and the linguistic other

What Is Democracy?

Abstract Modern democracies, including the United States, rely upon three normative elements: (1) rights expressing the dignity of the citizen; (2) law expressing a commitment to public reason; (3) elections as the method of selecting representatives. In each dimension, citizens are to see a representation of themselves as popular sovereign. Morality and law are not matters to be resolved at the polls. Yet, popular opinion, supported by contemporary social sciences, tends to reduce democracy to the third element. On this view, the higher the voter turnout, the better the democracy. In an age in which we worry as much about majority, as minority, tyranny, this view is not credible. A mob at the polls is still a mob even if it is a majority. An exclusive focus on quantification represents a profound misunderstanding of the meaning of democracy. Democratic politics includes an interpretive practice across the moral and the legal dimensions. It relies as much on persuasion as on proof. Recovery of a vibrant democratic life requires a renewed appreciation of a public humanities, not as a pastime but as way of living.

Introduction to the symposium on A Perfectionist Theory of Justice by Collis Tahzib

ABSTRACT This Introduction summarises some of the central arguments in Collis Tahzib’s important new book A Perfectionist Theory of Justice. It locates Tahzib’s contribution within the wider literature and highlights two distinctive features of his account. First, his incorporation of perfectionist considerations into his theory of justice. And, second, his perfectionist public reason liberalism.

From public health to political repression: COVID-19 lockdown measure in Hong Kong's opposition districts

Repression comes with costs, such as reducing regime legitimacy and citizen conformity. The COVID-19 pandemic was an opportunity and a pretext for authoritarian regimes to repress their populations at a low cost. This paper examines the case of Hong Kong, where restriction-testing declarations (RTDs) were used as a lockdown measure to facilitate mandatory testing for the virus from January 2021 to September 2022. Despite the government's claim that RTDs were implemented for public health reasons, statistical analyses showed that Hong Kong districts that opposed the regime or those with a mobilization legacy were more likely to be subject to RTDs, with the opposition district effect present only when COVID-19 infections were low. These RTDs highlight the authoritarian regime's tradeoff in using a nonpolitical measure to achieve its political aims and illustrates the enduring impact of past election and mobilization activities on the choice of selective repression sites in Hong Kong.

Kant, the scholarship condition, and linguistic racialization: comments on Lu-Adler’s Kant on Public Reason and the Linguistic Other

Kant, the scholarship condition, and linguistic racialization: comments on Lu-Adler’s Kant on Public Reason and the Linguistic Other

Bridging science communication and open science—Working inclusively toward the common good

The 2020–2022 pandemic highlighted concerns about “information disorders”, pressing for approaches capable of guiding the science-society alliance toward a mutually beneficial direction. This essay advocates for and presents a framework proposing the combination of Open Science (OS) and Science Communication (SciComm) practices. OS encourages public access to scientific material, while SciComm has historically enabled public understanding of scientific knowledge. Despite their similar goals, these two communities are disconnected. We draw on the concepts of “boundary object” and “epistemic trust” to demonstrate how this framework could foster a bond between scientific expertise and public reason toward an informed and inclusive common good. The OS-SciComm framework is based on the notion that ensuring transparency in science also requires “bridging tools” that deal with the complexity of scientific lexicon and processes. It values scientific expertise, but does not undermine citizens' capabilities in information processing and their interest in accessing scientific outputs. Our proposal also acknowledges controversies involving open scientific materials during the COVID-19 pandemic and advises caution when drawing conclusions from cases that are often context-specific. The OS-SciComm framework requires innovative ideas, platforms and actions. We invite both communities to join us in this endeavor.

The Harm of Social Media to Public Reason

AbstractIt is commonly agreed that so-called echo chambers and epistemic bubbles, associated with social media, are detrimental to liberal democracies. Drawing on John Rawls’s political liberalism, we offer a novel explanation of why social media platforms amplifying echo chambers and epistemic bubbles are likely contributing to the violation of the democratic norms connected to the ideal of public reason. These norms are clarified with reference to the method of (full) reflective equilibrium, which we argue should be cultivated as a civic virtue in the context of political justification. The paper demonstrates how epistemic bubbles and echo chambers are likely to be detrimental to the disposition to follow the method of reflective equilibrium in the political context. Based on this diagnosis the paper highlights the need for interventions that help cultivate reflective equilibrium as a civic virtue and the need for corresponding interdisciplinary research.

Towards a Capabilities-Based Conception of Distributive Epistemic Justice

ABSTRACT Despite a growing effort in recent years to theorize epistemic justice as a species of distributive justice from within a Rawlsian framework, there is as yet no well-worked out capabilities-based account. In this paper, we set out to provide one. According to our sufficientarian conception, epistemic justice requires a distribution of capabilities that ensures to all individuals opportunities for minimal epistemic agency, publicly conceived. We argue that this conception has advantages over existing resourcist accounts of distributive epistemic justice inspired by Rawls as well as over Miranda Fricker’s tentative capabilities-based alternative. We contend that epistemic justice concerns a plurality of capabilities for epistemic agency, where the scope and nature of these capabilities is ultimately left open to discernment through public reasoning, but where equal emphasis is placed on contributing as well as retrieving epistemic goods and resources from common pools and on exerting combined capabilities as well as developing internal ones in the first place.

Exploring Domains of Quality-of-Life with Vulnerable Young People in Bogotá: A Capability Approach Perspective

Young adults aged 18–28 represent a pivotal demographic whose experiences of inequality significantly shape their life trajectories in cities. Despite their potential for innovation and social advancement, public agendas often marginalize their needs and aspirations. This paper explores urban inequality among young adults by examining how they define and value different aspects of their daily lives when urban inequality is at play. Drawing on focus group discussions in two socioeconomically segregated urban districts in Bogotá, this paper employs the capability approach to construct a comprehensive list of 15 capability domains that young adults use to define and value their daily experiences. The paper adds to the existing literature a detail a step-by-step process involving the identification, selection, and ranking of relevant capabilities, with young adults actively engaged in value judgements through a deliberative process of public reasoning. Findings reveal that quality-of-life domains for young adults extend beyond traditional youth policy sectors, encompassing political participation, public space and mobility, social norms, and independence. The results not only expand the scope of existing youth agendas but also align with demands expressed during recent social unrest in Colombia and the region, where young adults have played a central and vocal role.

Education for Robust Self‐Respect in an Unjust World†

AbstractPhilosophical work on self‐respect has distinguished between various kinds of self‐respect. In this paper, Shiying Li begins by introducing important kinds of self‐respect and exploring the conceptual and empirical relations among them. She then discusses the value and political significance of social bases of self‐respect for both individuals and society. While political theory on this topic, especially from the Rawlsian tradition, has focused on the social bases of self‐respect in a well‐ordered society, Li takes on the task of uncovering the social bases of self‐respect in an unjust society marked by structural injustices such as racism, sexism, social stigmas, and economic and other social inequalities. She provides arguments, including public reason arguments, for the political priority and urgency of securing robust self‐respect for all in an unjust society, and thus paves the way for a discussion of the role that education, especially schooling, can and should play in securing robust self‐respect. Li concludes by offering reasons to direct special attention to specific aspects of schooling and by making suggestions regarding a curriculum and pedagogy aimed at securing robust self‐respect for all.

A Revolutionary Faith: Liberation Theology between Public Religion and Public Reason. By Raúl E. Zegarra.

A Revolutionary Faith: Liberation Theology between Public Religion and Public Reason. By Raúl E. Zegarra.

Political Meritocracy Based on Public Reason

Political Meritocracy Based on Public Reason

Minding the gap between public administration curriculum and practice: The studio of public reasoning

It has always been a crucial question as to what kind of education should be provided to practitioners working at different levels of public administration, starting from the street level onwards, and what kind of interactions should be used to develop their competencies once in office. However, especially in the last 30 years, as we have entered a period of accelerating technological and institutional transformations, this issue has gained a dimension beyond the discussions on higher education and training for service. In addition to how public administration education will relate to practice as seen in traditional debates, new questions have emerged, such as how this engagement with practice can provide a perspective on institutional transformation, how those working in institutions can perceive their transformation processes more accurately, and ultimately, what kind of interaction can be achieved between those receiving public administration education and those working in public institutions. To answer these questions, an innovative model called “studio of public reasoning” was developed in 2009 for a university in public administration education in Turkey to create a platform for interaction with the external stakeholders of the university through an applied course. This Program has been implemented continuously for 15 years at the same university and more than 1000 students, about 100 public institutions of different scales and about 300 public administrators have benefited from the Program. In this paper, based on this experience, the gains of innovative teaching practices in public administration discipline in interacting with external stakeholders are critically evaluated through interviews with students, academics and administrators to assess whether alternatives are possible in establishing non-hierarchical external stakeholder interaction together with formal higher education for public administration.

Public Reason Illiberalism and Ideology

ABSTRACT This paper describes public reason communitarianism, a theory which is isomorphic to public reason liberalism. It contains the same internal diversity and debates, and the same fundamental structure and argumentation as public reason liberalism. However, while public reason liberals believe that public reason will converge on liberal outcomes, hypothetical public reason communitarians hold that public reason converges, for largely the same reason, on communitarianism. From the outside, there seems to be no good grounds for preferring one over the other. We offer this theory as a challenge for public reason liberalism, as it poses a dilemma. If public reason liberals admit the coherence of the communitarian version of their view, then public reason does not uniquely generate liberal outcomes, and indeed in the real world probably fails to justify liberalism, even to all reasonable people committed to public reason. If liberals want to deny the coherence of the view, though, it seems they must rely on question-begging liberal premises or question-begging interpretations of key concepts in the public reason view. Thus, contrary to their self-understanding, their view is ideological after all.

Kant on public reason and the linguistic Other

Kant on public reason and the linguistic Other

How not to argue for the presumption of liberty

ABSTRACT Many liberal philosophers claim that people are free to do as they will by default; any interference must be justified. This supposed presumption of liberty does a significant amount of theoretical work for public reason liberals such as Gerald Gaus and John Rawls. This paper shows that Gaus’s explicit defense of a presumption of liberty fails. Gausa and his many followers repeatedly appeal to a particular thought experiment from Stanley Benn. We argue that this thought experiment fails to show that there is a presumption of liberty, but instead shows, at best, the trivial point that when any particular moral concern is specified to be the only relevant concern, then there is a presumption in favor of that concern. Further, Gaus, along with Shaun Nichols, has tried to demonstrate empirically that the intuitions and conclusions he draws from this example are fairly uniform and universal among other moral agents, but we explain why their experimental results do not vindicate any such conclusion. We conclude that undermining the alleged presumption of liberty places public reason liberalism in serious jeopardy.

Dialectics of Islamic and Christian Public Sphere in Kediri

Islam and Christianity are religions that have been present in Indonesia for centuries, the history of these two religions cannot be separated from the existence of the Indonesian nation. As time goes by, the relationship between these two religions fluctuates (between conflict and harmony), in certain areas Islam becomes dominant, but in other areas Christianity is the dominant religion. National History records that several times Islam and Christianity were involved in religious conflicts. The dialectic of the relationship between the two religions in the public sphere is the key to fluctuations in the relationship between Islam and Christianity, such as what happened in the Kediri area where Islam and Christianity both exist in the public sphere. Therefore, this research attempts to portray the relationship between Islam and Christianity in public spheres by using a qualitative approach in research, while the technique for obtaining data in research uses interview and observation techniques. The research results show that religion's control of public sphere has exceeded formal and informal boundaries as discussed by Jurgen Habermas. These formal and informal boundaries are exceeded in "public values", namely viewing religious teachings in the public sphere based on the principle of beneficial value. This also goes beyond Jurgen Habermas's thinking about "Public Reason" in looking at the formal and informal areas of religion in the public sphere.

Identification of synthetic cathinone positional isomers using electron activated dissociation mass spectrometry

BackgroundSynthetic cathinones (SCs) are a large category of new psychoactive substances (NPS), which pose a serious threat to public health due to limited information about their toxicology and pharmacology. Many SCs are closely related in their chemical structures, with some substances being positional isomers. In this study, we propose a new workflow for the identification of SC isomers using liquid chromatography-high-resolution tandem mass spectrometry (LC-HRMS2) combined with electron activated dissociation (EAD) and chemometrics. Differentiation between isomeric SCs is essential for both legislative and public safety reasons, since minor differences in their molecular structures may change their legal status and pharmacological profiles. ResultsThe workflow was optimized using ring-substituted isomers of methylmethcathinones, methylethcathinones, and chloromethcathinones. The kinetic energy in the EAD cell was investigated at three levels (i.e., 15, 18, and 20 eV) for each group. Two data analysis methods (i.e., t-distributed stochastic neighbor embedding [t-SNE] and a Random Forest [RF] algorithm) were applied using the obtained EAD mass spectral data. The three sets of ring-substituted SCs were clearly distinguished using t-SNE and an RF algorithm. Moreover, the RF approach resulted in a 97 % classification accuracy for isomer identification using various combinations of compounds, isomers, and electron kinetic energies. This workflow was subsequentially applied to the analysis of 26 blind street samples, resulting in a 92 % classification accuracy for isomer identification. However, the accuracy varied based on the kinetic electron energy. A subset of the original data set, focusing on 15-eV data only, was used, resulting in a classification accuracy of 100 %. SignificanceThis study presents the first LC-HRMS2 workflow based on EAD and chemometrics, which resulted in a classification accuracy of 100 % of authentic street samples. The developed LC-HRMS2 workflow demonstrates that EAD product ions and their characteristic ion ratios can be successfully used to identify ring-substituted positional isomers of SCs.

Constitutional public reason book symposium: public reason and the smoking out of illicit motives

This article reviews Wojciech Sadurski’s book on public reason. Sadurski’s main argument is that courts can determine whether a law expresses fundamental respect for persons by performing a motive review. The review will focus predominantly on the second part of Sadurski’s book where he reconstructs the domestic case law of different constitutional and supreme courts to highlight that these courts often make use of a motive review without explicitly saying so. The article offers four comments: first, I believe that Sadurski’s reconstruction of the case law of different constitutional courts is largely correct. Courts do indeed often perform a motive review under the proportionality test without explicitly acknowledging this. Second, I do not share Sadurski’s normative inclination that courts should be more open in labelling their motive review as such as this could lead to political backlash. Third, I fear that the concept of public reason as motive review is underinclusive. I argue that motive review does not cover (and should not cover) the majority of what courts do when reviewing government action. The final comment addresses the third part of the book on international governance, where I argue that Sadurski’s conception is slightly too court-centric.

Constitutional adjudication and the changing content of public reason: some reflections on Wojciech Sadurski’s Constitutional Public Reason1

In Constitutional Public Reason, Wojciech Sadurski contributes to our understanding of constitutional liberal democracy by bringing together public reason, constitutional theory, and detailed constitutional law in a powerful and productive way. Sadurski’s account of public reason, one that is in many important respects different from John Rawls’s own account, correctly recognises the mutability of the content of public reason. I argue that the recognition of the mutability of the content of public reason, however, puts pressure on Sadurski’s characterisation of the relationship between courts and public reason.