Public Reason and Religious Discourse in Democracy: Discussions From Habermas’ Criticism on Rawls’ Political Liberalism

Main Article Content

Guilherme Saraiva Grava
Ana Beatriz Guimarães Passos

Abstract

Considering that pluralism is a major challenge to contemporary political philosophy, the paper discusses the implications of Habermas’ criticism on Rawls' Political Liberalism, with a focus on the issue of the role of religious discourse in the political environment. This analysis inquires if the conceptual differences between the two authors effectively lead them to different conclusions. As suggested by Yates (2007), this paper works with the hypothesis that both theses require from the postulants of religious doctrines an effort of separation between their comprehensive views and a conception of justice with neutral bases of justification.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
GRAVA, Guilherme Saraiva; PASSOS, Ana Beatriz Guimarães. Public Reason and Religious Discourse in Democracy: Discussions From Habermas’ Criticism on Rawls’ Political Liberalism. Revista de Teorias da Justiça, da Decisão e da Argumentação Jurídica, Florianopolis, Brasil, v. 2, n. 2, p. 158–175, 2016. DOI: 10.26668/IndexLawJournals/2525-9644/2016.v2i2.1700. Disponível em: https://indexlaw.org/index.php/revistateoriasjustica/article/view/1700. Acesso em: 19 dec. 2024.
Section
Artigos
Author Biographies

Guilherme Saraiva Grava, Fundação Getúlio Vargas - FGV Direito SP, São Paulo, SP

Mestrando em Direito e Desenvolvimento pela Fundação Getúlio Vargas - FGV Direito SP, São Paulo, SP, (Brasil). Bacharel em Direito pela Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo, PUC/SP, São Paulo, SP, (Brasil).

Ana Beatriz Guimarães Passos, Fundação Getúlio Vargas - FGV Direito SP, São Paulo, SP

Mestranda em Direito e Desenvolvimento pela Fundação Getúlio Vargas - FGV Direito SP, São Paulo, SP, (Brasil). Bacharel em Direito pela Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo, PUC/SP, São Paulo, SP, (Brasil). 

References

FORST, R. The Right to Justification: Elements of a Constructivist Theory of Justice. Tradução de Jeffrey Flynn. Nova York: Columbia University Press, 2012.

GLEDHILL, J. Procedure in Substance and Substance in Procedure: Reframing the Rawls-Habermas Debate. In: FINLAYSON, J. G.; FREYENHAGEN, F., (Eds.) Habermas and Rawls: disputing the political (Coleção Routledge studies in contemporary philosophy). Nova York: Routledge, 2011. p. 181-199.

HABERMAS, J. Reconciliation Through the Public use of Reason: Remarks on John Rawls's Political Liberalism (Tradução de Ciaran Cronin). The Journal of Philosophy, v. 92, n. 3, p.109-131, 1995.

________. Religion in the Public Sphere. (Tradução de Jeremy Gaines). The European Journal of Philosophy, v.14, n.1, p.1-25, 2006.

MAUTNER, M. Religion in Politics: Rawls and Habermas on Deliberation and Justification. [Working paper]. Social Science Research Network. Disponível eletronicamente em: <http://ssrn.com/abstract=2164733>. Acesso em: 15 de junho de 2015.

FREEMAN, S. John Rawls: An Overview. In: ________. (Ed.). The Cambridge Companion to Rawls (Coleção Cambridge Companions to Philosophy). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003, p. 347-367.

RAWLS, J. A Theory of Justice (Revised edition). Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999.

________. Political Liberalism (Expanded Edition). Nova York: Columbia University Press, 2005.

VIEIRA, Oscar Vilhena. A Moralidade da Constituição e os Limites da Empreitada Interpretativa, ou entre Beethoven e Bernstein. In: SILVA, Virgílio Afonso da (Org.). Interpretação Constitucional. São Paulo: Malheiros Editores, 2005, p. 217-254.

YATES, Melissa. Rawls and Habermas on religion in the public sphere. Philosophy & Social Criticism, v. 33, n. 7, p.880-891, 2007.