Arguing from identity: ontology to advocacy in Charles Taylor's political thought
- Authors: Sadian, Samuel Dominic
- Date: 2009
- Subjects: Taylor, Charles, 1931- -- Political and social views Taylor, Charles, 1931- -- Criticism and interpretation Cultural pluralism Political culture Identity (Philosophical concept) Ontology
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MA
- Identifier: vital:2829 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1003039
- Description: In this thesis I discuss three normative claims that I take to be central elements of Charles Taylor’s political thought. The first of these is Taylor’s contention that, in contemporary pluralistic societies, justifying socially prevailing norms by appealing to universally binding moral values is unlikely to promote social solidarity. Because this approach tends to downplay the goods that people realise through membership in particular associations, Taylor believes we must adopt a model of justification that does not prioritise universal over particular goods if we are to further social co-operation. A second claim Taylor defends is that commitment to the liberal value of collective self-rule implies treating patriotically motivated public service as a non-instrumental good. We should not, Taylor argues, regard collective association as nothing more than a means to satisfying private goals. Taylor advances a third claim, that is, he maintains that liberal toleration for diverse ways of life may require a perfectionist state that supports particularistic ways of life when they are threatened by decline. I offer a qualified defence of the first two claims, but suggest that the third is less compelling. I attempt to do this by evaluating Taylor’s claims against the standards of lucid argumentation that he himself lays down. In discussing social and political norms, which he describes as “advocacy” issues, Taylor argues that our normative commitments necessarily rely on an underlying social ontology. More specifically, Taylor argues that the political values we defend are those that enable us to secure the interests we have as the bearers of an identity possessing both individual and collective dimensions. In setting out the conditions that favour integrated and free identity formation we may thereby reach a clearer understanding of the political norms that we wish to endorse. I argue that, while Taylor’s ontological reflections might well incline us to accept his model of justification and his account of patriotic social commitment, they do not of themselves dispose us to accept state perfectionism.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2009
- Authors: Sadian, Samuel Dominic
- Date: 2009
- Subjects: Taylor, Charles, 1931- -- Political and social views Taylor, Charles, 1931- -- Criticism and interpretation Cultural pluralism Political culture Identity (Philosophical concept) Ontology
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MA
- Identifier: vital:2829 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1003039
- Description: In this thesis I discuss three normative claims that I take to be central elements of Charles Taylor’s political thought. The first of these is Taylor’s contention that, in contemporary pluralistic societies, justifying socially prevailing norms by appealing to universally binding moral values is unlikely to promote social solidarity. Because this approach tends to downplay the goods that people realise through membership in particular associations, Taylor believes we must adopt a model of justification that does not prioritise universal over particular goods if we are to further social co-operation. A second claim Taylor defends is that commitment to the liberal value of collective self-rule implies treating patriotically motivated public service as a non-instrumental good. We should not, Taylor argues, regard collective association as nothing more than a means to satisfying private goals. Taylor advances a third claim, that is, he maintains that liberal toleration for diverse ways of life may require a perfectionist state that supports particularistic ways of life when they are threatened by decline. I offer a qualified defence of the first two claims, but suggest that the third is less compelling. I attempt to do this by evaluating Taylor’s claims against the standards of lucid argumentation that he himself lays down. In discussing social and political norms, which he describes as “advocacy” issues, Taylor argues that our normative commitments necessarily rely on an underlying social ontology. More specifically, Taylor argues that the political values we defend are those that enable us to secure the interests we have as the bearers of an identity possessing both individual and collective dimensions. In setting out the conditions that favour integrated and free identity formation we may thereby reach a clearer understanding of the political norms that we wish to endorse. I argue that, while Taylor’s ontological reflections might well incline us to accept his model of justification and his account of patriotic social commitment, they do not of themselves dispose us to accept state perfectionism.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2009
Conflict, contradiction and crisis: an analysis of the politics of AIDS policy in post-Apartheid South Africa
- Authors: Fletcher, Haley Kim
- Date: 2009
- Subjects: AIDS (Disease) -- Political aspects -- Africa, Southern AIDS (Disease) -- Political aspects -- South Africa AIDS (Disease) -- Government policy -- South Africa Africa -- Politics and government
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MA
- Identifier: vital:2775 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1002985
- Description: Despite the profound impacts of HIV and AIDS on all sectors of South African society, governmental responses to the AIDS epidemic have been inundated with contradiction, conflict and contestation. Though governmental leaders have justified not funding HIV treatment programs because they believe that poverty needs to be dealt with first, social spending has been slashed as part of an adherence to a neo-liberal economic model. Though it would seem that the government would seem to have everything to gain by establishing a cooperative relationship with non-governmental actors regarding the epidemic, the relationship between the government and non-governmental actors has instead been described as nothing short of hostile. Though the government enthusiastically backed Virodene, a supposed treatment for AIDS that turned out to be no more than an industrial solvent, other ‘scientifically backed’ AIDS treatments have been treated with caution and skepticism – to the point where the government even refused to provide funding for programs to prevent mother to child transmission of the virus. And perhaps the most perplexing is that although widely respected for his intellect and cool demeanor, former President Mbeki chose to risk his political career on the AIDS issue by shunning away from the mainstream consensus on the biomedical causes of the epidemic and instead surrounded himself and sought advice from AIDS ‘dissidents’ This thesis will seek explanations for these apparent contradictions. Using Bourdieu’s (1986) typology of capitals, it will build on an argument put forward by Helen Schneider (2002): from the South African government’s perspective, the contestation regarding HIV and AIDS policy and implementation is over symbolic capital, or the right to legitimately hold and exercise political power regarding the epidemic. Though this argument helps explain the conflictual relationship between the government and non-governmental actors regarding the AIDS crisis, in order to understand the perplexing contradictions within the governmental policy response, the political context of policy formation must first be taken into consideration.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2009
- Authors: Fletcher, Haley Kim
- Date: 2009
- Subjects: AIDS (Disease) -- Political aspects -- Africa, Southern AIDS (Disease) -- Political aspects -- South Africa AIDS (Disease) -- Government policy -- South Africa Africa -- Politics and government
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MA
- Identifier: vital:2775 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1002985
- Description: Despite the profound impacts of HIV and AIDS on all sectors of South African society, governmental responses to the AIDS epidemic have been inundated with contradiction, conflict and contestation. Though governmental leaders have justified not funding HIV treatment programs because they believe that poverty needs to be dealt with first, social spending has been slashed as part of an adherence to a neo-liberal economic model. Though it would seem that the government would seem to have everything to gain by establishing a cooperative relationship with non-governmental actors regarding the epidemic, the relationship between the government and non-governmental actors has instead been described as nothing short of hostile. Though the government enthusiastically backed Virodene, a supposed treatment for AIDS that turned out to be no more than an industrial solvent, other ‘scientifically backed’ AIDS treatments have been treated with caution and skepticism – to the point where the government even refused to provide funding for programs to prevent mother to child transmission of the virus. And perhaps the most perplexing is that although widely respected for his intellect and cool demeanor, former President Mbeki chose to risk his political career on the AIDS issue by shunning away from the mainstream consensus on the biomedical causes of the epidemic and instead surrounded himself and sought advice from AIDS ‘dissidents’ This thesis will seek explanations for these apparent contradictions. Using Bourdieu’s (1986) typology of capitals, it will build on an argument put forward by Helen Schneider (2002): from the South African government’s perspective, the contestation regarding HIV and AIDS policy and implementation is over symbolic capital, or the right to legitimately hold and exercise political power regarding the epidemic. Though this argument helps explain the conflictual relationship between the government and non-governmental actors regarding the AIDS crisis, in order to understand the perplexing contradictions within the governmental policy response, the political context of policy formation must first be taken into consideration.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2009
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »