Friday, July 29, 2011

New Book: "Elements of Moral Cognition" by John Mikhail


Elements of Moral Cognition
Rawls' Linguistic Analogy and the Cognitive Science of Moral and Legal Judgment

by John Mikhail

(Cambridge University Press, August 2011)

408 pages


Description


Is the science of moral cognition usefully modeled on aspects of Universal Grammar? Are human beings born with an innate 'moral grammar' that causes them to analyse human action in terms of its moral structure, with just as little awareness as they analyse human speech in terms of its grammatical structure? Questions like these have been at the forefront of moral psychology ever since John Mikhail revived them in his influential work on the linguistic analogy and its implications for jurisprudence and moral theory. In this seminal book, Mikhail offers a careful and sustained analysis of the moral grammar hypothesis, showing how some of John Rawls' original ideas about the linguistic analogy, together with famous thought experiments like the trolley problem, can be used to improve our understanding of moral and legal judgement.

Contents

Part I. Theory
1. The question presented [preview, pdf]
2. A new framework for the theory of moral cognition
3. The basic elements of Rawls' linguistic analogy

Part II. Empirical Adequacy
4. The problem of descriptive adequacy
5. The moral grammar hypothesis
6. Moral grammar and intuitive jurisprudence: a formal model

Part III. Objections and Replies
7. R. M. Hare and the distinction between empirical and normative adequacy
8. Thomas Nagel and the competence-performance distinction
9. Ronald Dworkin and the distinction between I-morality and E-morality

Part IV. Conclusion
10. Toward a universal moral grammar.

John Mikhail is Professor of Law and Philosophy at Georgetown University.

Also
* Podcast with John Mikhail on "Universal Moral Grammar" [mp3] (Philosophy Bites, June 2011).

* Article on "Universal Moral Grammar: Theory, Evidence, and the Future" (2007)

* "Rawls' Linguistic Analogy: A Study of the 'Generative Grammar' Model of Moral Theory Described by John Rawls in 'A Theory of Justice.'" (Phd Dissertation, Cornell University, 2000)

* New paper: "Rawls' Concept of Reflective Equilibrium and its Original Function in 'A Theory of Justice'" (Washington University Jurisprudence Review, Vol. 3, 2010).

Tuesday, July 26, 2011

Papers from Berlin Colloquium on Law and Religion

Papers from colloquium on "Rethinking Law in a Global Context: Law and Religion", Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung, May-July 2011:

Professor Noah Feldman (Harvard)
Racism, Incitement, and the Suppression of Religious Speech [pdf]

Professor Joseph H. H. Weiler (New York)
State, Church, Nation - An European Perspective [pdf]

Professor Rainer Forst (Frankfurt)
"Dulden heißt Beleidigen". Der umstrittene Begriff der Toleranz [pdf]

Professor Hans Michael Heinig (Göttingen)
Religionsfreiheit in Europa [pdf]

Professor Christoph Möllers (Berlin)
Autonomie der Religion – aus verfassungstheoretischer Perspektive

Professor Gunnar Folke Schuppert (Berlin)
When Governance meets Religion [pdf]

Sunday, July 24, 2011

Interview with Martha Nussbaum in "The Australian"

In "The Australian" (July 13, 2011), a short interview with Professor Martha Nussbaum on her book "Not for Profit" (Princeton University Press, 2010):

"Our world needs the humanities"

Excerpt:

Q: In your writing, we encounter a person called the world citizen. How would I spot one in a bar?

A: Well, I think you'd have to strike up a conversation about some global topic: free-trade coffee, global warming or terrorism. Then you'd see whether this person was just parroting slogans from the media or was really thinking for him or herself. You'd see whether there was at least a reasonable degree of knowledge behind the claims being made. I'd also look for a high level of listening and curiosity, some self-doubt and humility rather than complacency, and an ability to imagine what other people are thinking and feeling.

See my previous post on "Not for Profit" here.

Friday, July 22, 2011

Habermas: How Democratic is the EU?

"Blätter für deutsche und internationale Politik" (August 2011) has an article by Jürgen Habermas on the current crisis in the EU:

Wie demokratisch ist die EU?
Die Krise der Europäischen Union im Licht einer Konstitutionalisierung des Völkerrechts

The article is an enlarged version of Habermas's speech at Humboldt University, Berlin, on June 16, 2011. The speech was published in "Der Handelsblatt", June 17, 2011, entitled "Das Europa der Staatsbürger". See my post here.

Excerpts:
"Eines Tages wird man im Rückblick erkennen, dass die Politik in dem Augenblick, als die List der ökonomischen Vernunft das Thema ans Tageslicht brachte, an der Schwelle von der ökonomischen zur politischen Einigung Europas unschlüssig den Atem angehalten hat. Gewiss, angesichts der gegenwärtigen Krise wird oft gefragt, warum wir überhaupt an der EU, gar an dem Ziel einer engeren politischen Union festhalten sollen, wo sich doch das ursprüngliche Motiv, Kriege in Europa unmöglich zu machen, erschöpft habe. Darauf gibt es nicht nur eine gute Antwort. Ich möchte den Versuch machen, ein neues, überzeugendes Narrativ aus der Sicht eines inspirierten Völkerrechts zu entwickeln und die Europäische Union als einen Schritt auf dem Wege zu einer politisch verfassten Weltgesellschaft zu begreifen. Nach meiner Einschätzung kann das bisher von den politischen Eliten hinter verschlossenen Türen betriebene Projekt nicht mehr ohne eine normativ ansteckende Perspektive auf den hemdsärmeligen Modus eines lärmend-argumentierenden Meinungskampfes in der breiten Öffentlichkeit umgepolt werden. [....] Die anhaltende politische Fragmentierung steht im Widerspruch zum systemischen Zusammenwachsen der Weltgesellschaft und blockiert Fortschritte in der rechtlichen „Zivilisierung“ der zwischenstaatlichen Gewalt. [....]

[Ich muss].... zunächst eine Denkblockade beiseiteräumen, die mit einem kollektivistisch missverstandenen Demokratiebegriff den Blick nach vorn versperrt (1). Die Transnationalisierung der Volkssouveränität möchte ich sodann mit Hilfe von drei variablen Bestandteilen begreifen, die nur auf der nationalen Ebene ganz zur Deckung kommen – zum einen die horizontale Vergemeinschaftung von freien und gleichen Rechtspersonen, zum anderen die staatliche Organisation und schließlich das Integrationsmedium staatsbürgerlicher Solidarität (2). Auf der europäischen Ebene treten diese Bestandteile in eine neue Konstellation. Die Gesamtheit der Unionsbürger teilt sich die Souveränität mit den Völkern der Mitgliedstaaten, die ihr Gewaltmonopol behalten, sich aber dem supranational gesetzten Recht unterordnen (3). Diese Rekonfiguration der Bestandteile eines demokratischen Gemeinwesens müsste keine Legitimationseinbuße bedeuten, weil die Bürger Europas gute Gründe dafür haben, dass der jeweils eigene Nationalstaat in der Rolle eines Mitgliedstaates weiterhin die bewährte Rolle eines Garanten von Recht und Freiheit spielt. Allerdings müsste die Teilung der Souveränität zwischen den Bürgern der Europäischen Union und den Völkern der Mitgliedstaaten dann auch in den Formen der Mitgesetzgebung konsequent umgesetzt werden (4). Am Schluss komme ich auf das Thema jener Grenzen staatsbürgerlicher Solidarität zurück, die in der aktuellen Krise so erschreckend hervortreten (5)."


Monday, July 18, 2011

Claus Offe on Deliberative Democracy

Professor Claus Offe has published a paper on deliberative politics in "Czech Sociological Review" (2011/3):

"Crisis and Innovation of Liberal Democracy"
Can Deliberation Be Institutionalised?

[pdf]

Abstract:
"The paper explores the possible contributions of deliberative procedures of political will formation to solving the problems encountered by liberal democracies today. To begin with, four functions of liberal democracy are distinguished: securing international peace, guaranteeing legal as well as political peace domestically, and producing good active citizens. The following part of the argument distinguishes four structural features characteristic of democratic regimes: stateness, rule of law, political competition, and accountability of the rulers. Thirdly, a brief summary of critical accounts concerning democracy’s actual failures and symptoms of malfunctioning is presented. In the final section, two families of institutional innovations that are currently being proposed as remedies for the observed defi ciencies of democracy are explored: those leading to a better aggregation of given preferences of the citizens and those aimed at improving the process of preference formation itself. It is the latter, which constitutes the field of deliberative politics that is investigated at some length. Beneficial effects of deliberative procedures and essential features of deliberative structures are discussed with reference to latest developments in the theory and empirical research on deliberative democracy."

Claus Offe is Professor of Political Sociology at the Hertie School of Governance, Berlin.

(Thanks to the blog ABC Democracy for the pointer!)

Sunday, July 17, 2011

Lectures at the Hegel Conference in Stuttgart

Audio recordings are now available from the conference of the International Hegel Association 2011 "Freedom", Stuttgart, June 22-25, 2011:

From the programme:

Axel Honneth
Von der Armut unserer Freiheit. Größe und Grenzen der Hegelschen Sittlichkeitslehre

Martin Seel
Zu sich selbst kommen. Über das Ethische im Ästhetischen

R. Jay Wallace
Internalism about Responsibility

Philip Pettit
Freedom as an Essentially Public Good

Steven Lukes
The Illusion of Free Markets

Hans-Christoph Schmidt am Busch
"Freiheit" bei Hegel und Marx

Stephen Houlgate
Recht und Zutrauen in Hegels Begriff der Sittlichkeit

Egon Flaig on Habermas and the "Historikerstreit"

Professsor Egon Flaig (Rostock) has published an essay in "Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung" (July 13, 2011) on the so-called Historikerstreit (The Historians' Dispute) between Ernest Nolte and Jürgen Habermas et.al. in 1986-1989:

"Die Habermas-Methode"

Excerpt:
"Allen seriösen Historikern, die in die Debatte einstiegen, egal auf welcher Seite, fiel auf, wie und wo der Frankfurter Sozialphilosoph Zitate verkrümmte und den Kontrahenten Positionen unterstellte, um denunziatorische Urteile loszulassen. Gar nicht selten verbarg diese „Habermas-Methode“, dass der Sozialphilosoph keine Ahnung hatte von den theoretischen Voraussetzungen, mit denen etwa Nolte operierte. Es hätte keine Nachsicht geben dürfen, denn das Ausmaß der Zitate-Verkrümmungen war gigantisch; und sie hat kein Vorbild in der Geschichte deutscher Polemiken unter Wissenschaftlern. Habermas bediente sich journalistischer Tricks, und zwar solcher, die sonst dem Lumpenjournalismus vorbehalten waren. Es bleibt als Armutszeugnis bestehen, dass die Fachdisziplin sich nicht geschlossen dagegen wehrte. Die politischen Gräben waren plötzlich tiefer als Fundamente der Verpflichtung auf gemeinsame wissenschaftliche Standards. Das war das Neue; und es wäre ohne die mediale Zurichtung der Debatte wohl kaum passiert."

The essay is included in a new book on the "Historikerstreit", entitled "Singuläres Auschwitz? Ernst Nolte, Jürgen Habermas und 25 Jahre ,Historikerstreit'“, edited by Mathias Brodkorb (Adebor Verlag, 2011).


Responses to Flaig's essay and the book:

*Rudolf Walther - Setzen, Sechs, Herr Habermas!
(Die Tageszeitung, July 14, 2011)


*Henryk M. Broder - Gedenkt dem Gedenken!
(Die Welt, July 15, 2011)


*Micha Brumlik - Hellenische Übermenschen
(Die Tageszeitung, July 15, 2011).

UPDATE:
*Heinrich August Winkler - Hellas statt Holocaust
(Die Zeit, July 21, 2011)

*Norbert Frei - Freie Ideologieentfaltung
(Neue Zürcher Zeitung, August 2, 2011)

*Rudolf Walther - Habermas missverstehen
(Die Tageszeitung, August 17, 2011)


Jürgen Habermas's contributions to the "Historikerstreit" are published in his "Eine Art Schadensabwicklung" (Suhrkamp Verlag, 1987). English translations in "The German Critique" vol. 44 (1988), pp. 25-50, and in Jürgen Habermas - "The New Conservatism" (Polity Press, 1989).

Monday, July 04, 2011

Habermas - A Pact for or against Europe (in English)

The European Council of Foreign Relations (ECFR) has published an English translation of Jürgen Habermas's speech in Berlin on April 6, 2011:

"A Pact for or against Europe" (pdf).

The translation is published as an afterword in a new book, entitled "What Germany Thinks About Europe" (edited by Ulrike Guérot and Jacqueline Hénard). A German edition of the book is available here (pdf).

The speech was given by Habermas at a meeting on "Europe and the re-discovery of the German nation-state" arranged by the Berlin office of the European Council on Foreign Relations. The original speech is available here (pdf) and here ("Süddeutsche Zeitung", April 7, 2011). Excerpts have been published in "Blätter für deutsche und internationale Politik" (May, 2011).

See reports on Habermas's speech here.

Sunday, July 03, 2011

Brandom's Munich Hegel Lectures 2011

Robert Brandom's Munich Hegel Lectures 2011 are now available online:

"Knowing and Representing"

1. "Conceptual Realism and the Semantic Possibility of Knowledge" [Word]

2. "Representation and the Experience of Error" [Word]

3. "Following the Path of Despair to a Bacchanalian Revel" [Word]

The lectures were given in May and June at the Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich. See the programme here [pdf]. They present new texts on Hegel's "Introduction" to "The Phenomenology of Spirit".

Extra: "Some Post-Davidsonian Elements of Hegel’s Theory of Agency" [Word]

Robert Brandom is a Distinguished Professor of Philosophy at the University of Pittsburgh. He is the author of "Making It Explicit" (Harvard University Press, 1994), "Articulating Reasons" (Harvard University Press, 2000) and "Reason in Philosophy" (Harvard University Press, 2009). Later this year he will publish a new book on Harvard University Press, entitled "Perspectives on Pragmatism: Classical, Recent, and Contemporary".

See also Brandom's website for his seminar "A Spirit of Trust: A Semantic Reading of Hegel's Phenomenology" (Fall, 2010).

See my previous posts on Robert Brandom here and here.

New Book by Amartya Sen: Peace and Democratic Society


Peace and Democratic Society

ed. by Amartya Sen

(Open Book, June 2011)

164 pages




Description


Recent acts of terrorism and the current unrest in the Middle East remind us how important it is to understand the relationship between violence, peace and democracy. In a challenging and insightful essay, Amartya Sen explores ideas around 'organised violence' (such as war, genocide and terrorism) and violence against the individual. Highlighting the inadequacies of some of the widely accepted explanations for violence – including the idea that the world is experiencing a 'clash of civilisations' – Sen makes a plea for a global, multilateral debate on the causes of conflict, and an understanding of the multiple identities of the individuals involved.

Contents [preview]

Part 1

"Violence and Civil Society"
by Amartya Sen

Part 2

"Civil Paths to Peace"
Report of the Commonwealth Commission on Respect and Understanding

1. Why do Respect and Understanding Matter?
2. The Nature and Nurture of Violence
3. Poverty, Inequality and Humiliation
4. History, Grievance and Conflict
5. Political Participation
6. The Role of Media and Commonwealth
7. Young People and Education
8. Multilateralism and the International Order
9. The Way Forward and Conclusion

Amartya Sen is Lamont University Professor at Harvard University. His most recent book is "The Idea of Justice" (Harvard University Press, 2009). Amartya Sen chaired the Commission on Respect and Understanding. Among the other members is Professor Kwame Anthony Appiah.

See also the website of the Commonwealth Secretariat.


Saturday, July 02, 2011

Habermas on Jewish Philosophers in Germany

Jürgen Habermas participated in a conference on "Jüdische Stimmen im Diskurs der sechziger Jahre" at Schloss Elmau, Germany, June 27-28, 2011.

Today "Neue Zürcher Zeitung" features Habermas's contribution:


Grossherzige Remigranten
Über jüdische Philosophen in der frühen Bundesrepublik.

Excerpt:
"Wir waren durch den Zivilisationsbruch gegenüber dem spezifisch Deutschen in der Tiefe der deutschen Traditionen argwöhnisch geworden. Mindestens intuitiv war uns klar: Wer, wenn nicht sie, die «rassisch aussortiert» worden waren, während ihre Kollegen munter weitermachten, wer sonst könnte eine schärfere Sensibilität für die dunklen Elemente in den besten unserer moralisch korrumpierten Überlieferungen ausgebildet haben?"

See also reports here:

Arno Widmann - "Antisemitismus und Antikommunismus"
(Frankfurter Rundschau, June 1, 2011)

Richard Herzinger - "Flucht in den Messianismus"
(Die Welt, June 1, 2011)

Michael Stallknecht - "Wie es die Linke mit dem Antisemitismus hält" (Süddeutsche Zeitung, June 1, 2011)

See some photos here.

(Thanks to Burkard Kircher for the pointer).