The last several decades have witnessed a vibrant discussion about the proper political role of religion in pluralistic liberal democracies. An important part of that discussion has been a dispute about the role that religious and secular reasons properly play in the justification of state coercion. As I understand it, the standard view advocated by the members of that pantheon, and by many others as well, includes the following two claims, namely, that religious reasons cannot play a decisive role in justifying state coercion and that citizens and public officials in a liberal polity should not endorse state coercion that requires decisive religious support. I am skeptical about the standard view’s restrictions on religious reasons as a class – restrictions that apply to any and all religious considerations, to religious reasons as such. My main aim in this paper is to motivate skepticism regarding the standard view. I will try to achieve this aim by reflecting on what I take to be the paradigmatic case of state coercion, namely, the use of military violence in war.

Religione, rispetto e guerra: contro la visione canonica della religione in politicaIn: ETICA & POLITICA. - ISSN 1825-5167. - 18:1(2016 May 09), pp. 11-33.Religione, rispetto e guerra: contro la visione canonica della religione in politicaIn: ETICA & POLITICA. - ISSN 1825-5167. - 18:1(2016 May 09), pp. 11-33..

Religione, rispetto e guerra: contro la visione canonica della religione in politica

G. Bistagnino
Primo
2016

Abstract

The last several decades have witnessed a vibrant discussion about the proper political role of religion in pluralistic liberal democracies. An important part of that discussion has been a dispute about the role that religious and secular reasons properly play in the justification of state coercion. As I understand it, the standard view advocated by the members of that pantheon, and by many others as well, includes the following two claims, namely, that religious reasons cannot play a decisive role in justifying state coercion and that citizens and public officials in a liberal polity should not endorse state coercion that requires decisive religious support. I am skeptical about the standard view’s restrictions on religious reasons as a class – restrictions that apply to any and all religious considerations, to religious reasons as such. My main aim in this paper is to motivate skepticism regarding the standard view. I will try to achieve this aim by reflecting on what I take to be the paradigmatic case of state coercion, namely, the use of military violence in war.
Religious reasons; secular reasons; justified coercion; respect; war
Settore SPS/01 - Filosofia Politica
9-mag-2016
G. Bistagnino
Religione, rispetto e guerra: contro la visione canonica della religione in politicaIn: ETICA & POLITICA. - ISSN 1825-5167. - 18:1(2016 May 09), pp. 11-33.Religione, rispetto e guerra: contro la visione canonica della religione in politicaIn: ETICA & POLITICA. - ISSN 1825-5167. - 18:1(2016 May 09), pp. 11-33..
Article (translator)
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
EBERLE.pdf

accesso riservato

Tipologia: Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione 228.37 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
228.37 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2434/473845
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact