Pluralism

Nicholas Rescher presents a critical reaction against two currently influential tendencies of thought. On the one hand, he rejects the facile relativism that pervades contemporary social and academic life. On the other hand, he opposes the rationalism inherent in neo-contractarian theory--both in the idealized communicative-contract version promoted in continental European political philosophy by Jurgen Habermas, and in the idealized social contract version of the theory of political justice promoted in the Anglo-American context by John Rawls. Against such tendencies, Rescher's pluralist approach takes a more realistic and pragmatic line, eschewing the convenient recourse of idealization in cognitive and practical matters. Instead of a utopianism that looks to a uniquely perfect order that would prevail under ideal conditions, he advocates incremental improvements within the framework of arrangements that none of us will deem perfect but that all of us "can live with." Such an approach replaces the yearning for an unattainable consensus with the institution of pragmatic arrangements in which the community will acquiesce--not through agreeing on their optimality, but through a shared recognition among the dissonant parties that the available options are even worse.

Is a plural, polyethnic, democratic society possible? Starting with Ernest Gellner's observation that `culturally plural societies worked well in the past', but `genuine cultural pluralism ceases to be viable under current conditions', this study explores pluralism in three settings; early states, modern industrial societies, and the contemporary `postmodern' world. Through a nuanced discussion ranging from pre-colonial Africa and Mesoamerica, to European and American experiences in the twentieth century, Grillo explores the ways in which different social and political forms cope with ethnic and cultural diversity. The study uncovers a range of different kinds of pluralism, from out-and-out separatism, through varieties of multiculturalism, to looser forms of `hybridity'. Rather than advocating one configuration over another, this important new book outlines the range of choices facing our societies as, moving into the twenty-first century, we try to reconcile the competing demands of universalism and difference.

In developing a new theory of political and moral community, J. Donald Moon takes questions of cultural pluralism and difference more seriously than do many other liberal thinkers of our era: Moon is willing to confront the problem of how community can be created among those who have very different views about the proper ends of human life. Experiencing such profound disagreement, can we live together in a society under norms we all accept? In recent years, traditional ways of looking at this query have come under attack by post-modernists, feminists, and thinkers concerned with pluralism. Respectfully engaging their critiques, Moon proposes a reformulated liberalism that is intended to overcome the problems they have identified.

Plural values and conflicting values are often held to be conceptually problematic, threatening the very possibility of ethics, or at least of rational ethics. This book rejects this view. The author first demonstrates why it is so important to understand the issues raised by plural and conflicting values. This includes a full discussion of Aristotle's treatment of the issues. He then goes on to show that plurality and conflict are commonplace and generally unproblematic features of our everyday choice and action, and that they do allow for a sound and rational ethic.

Controversies about abortion, the environment, pornography, AIDS, and similar issues naturally lead to the question of whether there are any values that can be ultimately justified, or whether values are simply conventional. John Kekes argues that the present moral and political uncertainties are due to a deep change in our society from a dogmatic to a pluralistic view of values. Dogmatism is committed to there being only one justifiable system of values. Pluralism recognizes many such systems, and yet it avoids a chaotic relativism according to which all values are in the end arbitrary. Maintaining that good lives must be reasonable, but denying that they must conform to one true pattern, Kekes develops and justifies a pluralistic account of good lives and values, and works out its political, moral, and personal implications.

Providing a historical context to religious pluralism, Richard E. Wentz examines the challenges that this presents to denominationalism and civil religion, and considers the influence of secularism on the culture of religious pluralism.

"This work may prove a starting point for a broader discussion concerning polyarchies that will lead to additional substantial contributions in this very important area of scholarship. This succinct and easily readable volume is recommende for general university collections and audiences." Perspective Robert Waste presents a new method of analyzing community power and local governemtn aimed at keeping democracy as a central focus and resolving the conflicts that have created an impasse around key theoretical issues. Providing an in-depth study of Robert A. Dahl's theory of polyarchy and the secondary literature it has generated, Waste develops a model that not only offers a way to test municipla polyarchy empirically but appreciably strengthens the theoretical base of studies in this area.

William Galston is a distinguished political philosopher whose work is informed by the experience of having served from 1993-1995 as President Clinton's Deputy Assistant for Domestic Policy. Isaiah Berlin first advanced the moral theory of value pluralism in the 1950s and it subsequently was developed by a number of distinguisthed scholars, including Galston. In Liberal Pluralism, Galston defends a version of value pluralism for political theory and practice. Against the contentions of John Gray and others, Galston argues that value pluralism undergirds a kind of liberal politics that gives great weight to the ability of individuals and groups to live their lives in accordance with their deepest beliefs about what gives meaning and purpose to life. This account of liberal pluralism is shown to have important implications for political deliberation and decision-making, for the design of public institutions, and for the division of legitimate authority among government, religious institutions, civil society, parents and families, and individuals. Liberal pluralism leads to a vision of a good society in which political institutions are active in a limited sphere and in which, within broad limits, families and civil associations may organize and conduct themselves in ways that are not congruent with the principles that govern the public sphere. William Galston is Professor, School of Public Affairs, University of Maryland and Director at the Institute for Philosophy and Public Policy. He is the author of Liberal Purposes (Cambridge, 1991), which won the Spitz Prize. Galston's other books include Justice and the Human Good (Chicago, 1980) and IKant and the Problem of History (Chicago, 1975). He is also a Senior Advisor to the Democratic Leadership Council and the Progressive Policy Institute.

The editors and their contributors explore the world from a pluralistic perspective. There are several models proposed and used by authors that could serve as a framework for multicultural and diversity programs in both education and the workplace. The implementation of programs which target the workplace and specific strategies for success are identified. The international implications of globalization and the need for international as well as "at home" experiences are addressed by several authors. Regional research-based programs and strategies, in particular academic disciplines to promote pluralism, are explored from the university perspective. These models, strategies, and research findings should prove to be most useful for individuals seeking to implement programs to promote pluralism.