How (not What) Shall We Think about Human Rights and Religious Arguments? Public Reasoning and Beyond

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Thaler, Mathias
Data de Publicação: 2010
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/10316/36156
https://doi.org/10.4000/eces.553
Resumo: This paper addresses the question of how (not what) we should think about human rights and religious arguments. Thinking about this relationship is today particularly important, because conflicts over human rights in practice often turn around their theoretical problems. Should religious arguments be used to justify human rights? Or do we want human rights to be free from any partisan endorsement so as to avoid divisive interpretations of universal principles? Underlying these hard questions is the issue of justification in view of a plurality of cultural and religious traditions around the globe. If human rights can be transformed so as to defy the charge of Euro-centrism (of being parochially rooted in only one cultural and religious tradition), they need to creatively draw on, not pit themselves against, this plurality. This paper suggests a framework for such a positive and inclusive engagement with various cultures and religions that goes beyond the mainstream liberal model of “public reason”.
id RCAP_35d0049d51308db63d665b9d06b7156f
oai_identifier_str oai:estudogeral.uc.pt:10316/36156
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository_id_str 7160
spelling How (not What) Shall We Think about Human Rights and Religious Arguments? Public Reasoning and BeyondHuman rightsJustificationModus vivendiPluralismPublic reasonSecularismThis paper addresses the question of how (not what) we should think about human rights and religious arguments. Thinking about this relationship is today particularly important, because conflicts over human rights in practice often turn around their theoretical problems. Should religious arguments be used to justify human rights? Or do we want human rights to be free from any partisan endorsement so as to avoid divisive interpretations of universal principles? Underlying these hard questions is the issue of justification in view of a plurality of cultural and religious traditions around the globe. If human rights can be transformed so as to defy the charge of Euro-centrism (of being parochially rooted in only one cultural and religious tradition), they need to creatively draw on, not pit themselves against, this plurality. This paper suggests a framework for such a positive and inclusive engagement with various cultures and religions that goes beyond the mainstream liberal model of “public reason”.Centro de Estudos Sociais2010info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlehttp://hdl.handle.net/10316/36156http://hdl.handle.net/10316/36156https://doi.org/10.4000/eces.553https://doi.org/10.4000/eces.553eng1647-0737http://eces.revues.org/553Thaler, Mathiasinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2021-06-29T10:03:43Zoai:estudogeral.uc.pt:10316/36156Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T20:50:48.635080Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv How (not What) Shall We Think about Human Rights and Religious Arguments? Public Reasoning and Beyond
title How (not What) Shall We Think about Human Rights and Religious Arguments? Public Reasoning and Beyond
spellingShingle How (not What) Shall We Think about Human Rights and Religious Arguments? Public Reasoning and Beyond
Thaler, Mathias
Human rights
Justification
Modus vivendi
Pluralism
Public reason
Secularism
title_short How (not What) Shall We Think about Human Rights and Religious Arguments? Public Reasoning and Beyond
title_full How (not What) Shall We Think about Human Rights and Religious Arguments? Public Reasoning and Beyond
title_fullStr How (not What) Shall We Think about Human Rights and Religious Arguments? Public Reasoning and Beyond
title_full_unstemmed How (not What) Shall We Think about Human Rights and Religious Arguments? Public Reasoning and Beyond
title_sort How (not What) Shall We Think about Human Rights and Religious Arguments? Public Reasoning and Beyond
author Thaler, Mathias
author_facet Thaler, Mathias
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Thaler, Mathias
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Human rights
Justification
Modus vivendi
Pluralism
Public reason
Secularism
topic Human rights
Justification
Modus vivendi
Pluralism
Public reason
Secularism
description This paper addresses the question of how (not what) we should think about human rights and religious arguments. Thinking about this relationship is today particularly important, because conflicts over human rights in practice often turn around their theoretical problems. Should religious arguments be used to justify human rights? Or do we want human rights to be free from any partisan endorsement so as to avoid divisive interpretations of universal principles? Underlying these hard questions is the issue of justification in view of a plurality of cultural and religious traditions around the globe. If human rights can be transformed so as to defy the charge of Euro-centrism (of being parochially rooted in only one cultural and religious tradition), they need to creatively draw on, not pit themselves against, this plurality. This paper suggests a framework for such a positive and inclusive engagement with various cultures and religions that goes beyond the mainstream liberal model of “public reason”.
publishDate 2010
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2010
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/10316/36156
http://hdl.handle.net/10316/36156
https://doi.org/10.4000/eces.553
https://doi.org/10.4000/eces.553
url http://hdl.handle.net/10316/36156
https://doi.org/10.4000/eces.553
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 1647-0737
http://eces.revues.org/553
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Centro de Estudos Sociais
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Centro de Estudos Sociais
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
collection Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1799133788905668608