Civil Disagreement: Personal Integrity in a Pluralistic Society

by Edward Langerak

Overview

How can we agree to disagree in today’s pluralistic society, one in which individuals and groups are becoming increasingly polarized by fierce convictions that are often at odds with the ideas of others? Civil Disagreement: Personal Integrity in a Pluralistic Society shows how we can cope with diversity and be appropriately open toward opponents even while staying true to our convictions. This accessible and useful guide discusses how our conversations and arguments can respect differences and maintain personal integrity and civility even while taking stances on disputed issues. The author examines an array of illustrative cases, such as debates over slavery, gay marriage, compulsory education for the Amish, and others, providing helpful insights on how to take firm stands without denigrating opponents. The author proposes an approach called “perspective pluralism” that honors the integrity of various viewpoints while avoiding the implication that all reasonable views are equally acceptable or true.

Civil Disagreement offers a concise yet comprehensive guide for students and scholars of philosophical or religious ethics, political or social philosophy, and political science, as well as general readers who are concerned about the polarization that often seems to paralyze national and international politics.

Product Details

ISBN-13:	9781626160330
Publisher:	Georgetown University Press
Publication date:	03/11/2014
Edition description:	New Edition
Pages:	184
Product dimensions:	5.90(w) x 8.80(h) x 0.40(d)
Age Range:	18 Years

About the Author

Edward Langerak is professor emeritus, St. Olaf College, where he taught ethics and philosophy for over four decades, holding the Boldt/NEH Distinguished Teaching Chair in the Humanities from 2000 to 2003. He has been a recipient of the Woodrow Wilson, Kent (Danforth Foundation), and National Humanities Foundation fellowships.

Table of Contents

Preface

1. Conversations and ArgumentsStates of NatureConvictions, Commitments, and Integrity Uses of ConversationFour Types of Claims Conversations and ArgumentsCivility

2. Conflicts and PluralismsDiversityReasonable Pluralism Value PluralismReligious Pluralism Perspective Pluralism Pluralism and Other Isms

3. Toleration and RespectToleration and Tolerance History of Toleration Justifications: Prudence and Principle Cooperation and Compromise RespectVariations on Civil Disagreement

4. Laws and DissentersCivil Disagreement about Legislating Laws Accomodating Dissenters

5. Civil Disagreement: Conclusion

Works Cited

Index

What People are Saying About This

Edward Langerak’s book on political thought is a gem. Obviously, the author has lived a long time with one of the vexing problems in the West: how to engage in civil disagreement in a pluralistic society with personal integrity—without either unraveling the society or rivening (or silencing) the deep convictions of its participants. The book is masterfully organized, patiently clarifying where confusions (such as those among pluralism, liberalism, and relativism) would lead astray, and insightful throughout. Both the main text and the notes supply readers with a fine account of the lifelong conversations that went into the making of this splendid volume.

William F. May

Edward Langerak’s book on political thought is a gem. Obviously, the author has lived a long time with one of the vexing problems in the West: how to engage in civil disagreement in a pluralistic society with personal integrity—without either unraveling the society or rivening (or silencing) the deep convictions of its participants. The book is masterfully organized, patiently clarifying where confusions (such as those among pluralism, liberalism, and relativism) would lead astray, and insightful throughout. Both the main text and the notes supply readers with a fine account of the lifelong conversations that went into the making of this splendid volume.

Lloyd Steffen

This mature and philosophically sophisticated work makes an important contribution not only to the ethics of pluralism but to the even greater question of ethics—'How should we live?'—and its necessary correlate, 'How can we disagree yet live together in peace?'

Editorial Reviews

A worthy and timely contribution, arguably most laudable for its efforts to offer an alternative to the rash demonization and apathetic polarization that typically define contemporary political discourse in the United States.

Theological Studies

Langerak’s insightful work comes at an important moment in the history of American intellectual discourse. This moment is shaped by a dilemma over how to insure the free flow of ideas in a pluralistic society while protecting the most vulnerable. Conversely, our society should safeguard tolerant safe spaces, so as to protect and empower the underprivileged voices of the socially marginalized. Simultaneously, however, we must ensure a fruitful debate forum, often accompanied by the healthy discomfort of confrontation in disagreement. With wit and terminological precision, Langerak provides a framework for living within this tension: one meant to help persons navigate disagreements over important, often fundamental, social, political, and religious questions.

Religious Studies Review-MS 156

[This] book, the culmination of a long career of sensitive thinking and teaching on this subject, might be regarded as the last of its breed

Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews

Discussions in the area that Langerak is dealing with are full of terminological confusion; crucial terms are used with different meanings. Langerak performs a great service in drawing distinctions that dispel the confusion.

FAITH AND PHILOSOPHY

[This] book, the culmination of a long career of sensitive thinking and teaching on this subject, might be regarded as the last of its breed

A worthy and timely contribution, arguably most laudable for its efforts to offer an alternative to the rash demonization and apathetic polarization that typically define contemporary political discourse in the United States.

Discussions in the area that Langerak is dealing with are full of terminological confusion; crucial terms are used with different meanings. Langerak performs a great service in drawing distinctions that dispel the confusion.

Langerak's insightful work comes at an important moment in the history of American intellectual discourse. This moment is shaped by a dilemma over how to insure the free flow of ideas in a pluralistic society while protecting the most vulnerable. Conversely, our society should safeguard tolerant safe spaces, so as to protect and empower the underprivileged voices of the socially marginalized. Simultaneously, however, we must ensure a fruitful debate forum, often accompanied by the healthy discomfort of confrontation in disagreement. With wit and terminological precision, Langerak provides a framework for living within this tension: one meant to help persons navigate disagreements over important, often fundamental, social, political, and religious questions.

From the Publisher

Edward Langerak’s book on political thought is a gem. Obviously, the author has lived a long time with one of the vexing problems in the West: how to engage in civil disagreement in a pluralistic society with personal integrity—without either unraveling the society or rivening (or silencing) the deep convictions of its participants. The book is masterfully organized, patiently clarifying where confusions (such as those among pluralism, liberalism, and relativism) would lead astray, and insightful throughout. Both the main text and the notes supply readers with a fine account of the lifelong conversations that went into the making of this splendid volume.

William F. May

This mature and philosophically sophisticated work makes an important contribution not only to the ethics of pluralism but to the even greater question of ethics—'How should we live?'—and its necessary correlate, 'How can we disagree yet live together in peace?'

Lloyd Steffen