A Third Principle of Justice

In this paper I argue that in order to secure the commitment of believers in reasonable comprehensive doctrines to political liberalism a third principle of justice needs to be adopted in the Original Position. Rawls acknowledges that neutral legislation by the liberal state may negatively affect some reasonable comprehensive doctrines, and I offer a third principle of justice to help alleviate this problem. This principle, which I believe is in keeping with the United States constitutional history especially where church-state relations are concerned, maintains that a constitutional regime should, insofar as possible, avoid adopting rules with harmful effects upon those comprehensive doctrines which satisfy the conditions of reasonable pluralism.     

对心理咨询中价值干预问题的理性思考

对价值问题的处理是心理咨询中的重要哲学命题.人本主义心理学所遵循的"价值中立"原则,是心理咨询中回避价值干预的根源所在.通过对心理咨询理论的整体审视,提出不能简单地把价值中立原则拓展到整个心理咨询之中,不能忽视心理咨询的教育功能和社会责任,纯粹的"价值中立"是无法实现的.     

Beyond transference,countertransference, the silences and the opinion1

The author examines several works of an intersubjectivist trend, as well as writings by Hanly, Cavell and Bion, defending many of the named psychoanalysts' viewpoints. These viewpoints are expressed in the search and the struggle for truth, recognizing, like Popper, that truth exists but that we cannot know with certainty whether and when we touch upon it, only that this endless effort merits a lifetime's work because it is the attempt at an encounter with ourselves‐the true encounter. The author explains the criticisms by Green of Jacobs, and defends the maintenance of ‘a certain possible neutrality’ (Eizirik). He poses some questions with regard to Ogden's ‘third subject’, considering it, among other aspects, from the supervisory point of view, which may demonstrate the existence of ‘a certain possible objectivity’ of the emotional confl ict. He develops some criticisms concerning silence as an interpretative action by Ogden, and summarizes two case histories. Both were unconsciously attempting to manipulate the analyst intensely‐one of them to get the analyst to intervene in his love life, and the other to interrupt acting out.     

Moral and religious issues in education

Difficulties in liberal secularism are considered in relation to the views of ethnic minorities and in terms of the misleading nature of its supposed neutrality and objectivity. Cultural liberalism is seen in contrast to be committed to the preservation of other cultures and to celebrating diversity. This might avoid relativism and, within the Wisdom Tradition, offer a mutual enrichment and better access to truth. The practice of religious education can be seen as implicating the general behaviour of the teacher and the ethos of the school. A postmodernist pedagogy, involving dialogue with text and teacher, might both respect diversity and recover a sense of mystery. Reassessment of the relationship between knowledge and morality might lead to new practice in moral education, with relevant activities leading beyond the facts towards reflection on values. Moral education might also go beyond the intellect to encourage appropriate emotional dispositions in a communicative ethics. The dominance of certain metaphors in the language of cultural identity and authenticity channels thinking: this needs to be questioned.     

Activity/nonactivity and the group therapist: “Don't just do something,sit there”

The abstinent stance of psychoanalytically-oriented clinicians is often confused with passivity or coldness toward the patient or the group. Given the current move toward more active, shorter-term treatment, this paper offers a reaffirmation of the value of the abstinent analytic stance. The theoretical rationale for the technique is reviewed, and some specific arguments are made to illustrate the continuing importance of the method in the treatment of patients in psychodynamic group psychotherapy.Reputed to be Adlai Stevenson's advice to President John F. Kennedy during the Cuban Missile Crisis.     

Taking Religious Pluralism Seriously. Arguing for an Institutional Turn. Introduction

Discussions of the relations between religions, society, politics, and the state in recent political philosophy are characterized, firstly, by a strong US American bias focusing on limitations of religious arguments in public debate. Even if the restriction or radical exclusion of religious reasons from public debate has recently been extensively criticized, secularist interpretations of liberal-democratic constitutions still prevail. Here it is argued that both strong secularism and weak or second order secularism are counterproductive for many reasons. Secondly, separationist interpretations of state-church relations are predominant, even if the severe wall of separation is criticized more often nowadays. Here it is argued that there are more and more interesting options than either separationism or accommodationism, that we should not exclusively focus at the constitutional relations between state and churches but address the full reciprocal relationship between society, culture, politics, nation, state and (organized) religions, and that we need more historical and comparative perspectives for the required institutionalist turn in political theory in order to overcome the obstacles inherent in predominant American political philosophy. The articles included in this volume are first, modest steps in this new direction.     

Introduction: Beyond Toleration?

Although tolerance is widely regarded as a virtue of both individuals and groups that modern democratic and multiculturalist societies cannot do without, there is still much disagreement among political thinkers as to what tolerance demands, or what can be done to create and sustain a culture of tolerance. The philosophical literature on toleration contains three main strands. (1) An agreement that a tolerant society is more than a modus vivendi; (2) discussion of the proper object(s) of toleration; (3) debate about whether there is a ‘paradox’ of toleration and, if so, how it might be solved. This Introduction outlines how each of the subsequent papers addresses problems in the theory and practice of toleration, in the light of these three strands in the existing literature. This revised version was published online in August 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Are liberal perfectionism and neutrality mutually exclusive?

In this paper, I question the view that liberal perfectionism and neutrality are mutually exclusive doctrines. I do so by criticizing two claims made by Jonathan Quong. First, I object to his claim that comprehensive anti-perfectionism is incoherent. Second, I criticize his claim that liberal perfectionism cannot avoid a paternalist stance. I argue that Quong’s substantive assumptions about personal autonomy undermine both of his arguments. I use the discussion of Quong to argue that the standard assumption in liberal theory about mutual exclusivity of liberal perfectionism and neutrality needs to be reconsidered, and I show why the argument about the convergence of perfectionism and neutrality makes conceptual sense.     

How Irish Citizens Negotiate Foreign Policy: A Social Representations Approach to Neutrality

The present study investigates the relationship between the foreign policy orientation of Irish neutrality and national identity using a social representations approach (Elcheroth, Doise, & Reicher, 2011; Moscovici, 1961/76). In four focus groups conducted in the Republic of Ireland, 22 participants discussed vignettes in which hypothetical conflicts were described. The findings pointed towards the dynamic relationship between neutrality and Irish national identity and more generally to the importance of macropolitical phenomena for identity construction. The process of categorization was key to participants' decision making regarding the hypothetical conflicts; the decision to support or oppose the Irish state's involvement in the conflicts frequently revolved around a reconsideration of the boundaries of the ingroup. Furthermore, social representations were laden with the possibility of social change; the construction of neutrality as morally ambivalent, motivated by pragmatism rather than principles, opened up a space for younger participants to resist dominant, pragmatic interpretations of the policy and offer alternatives. Theoretical and empirical implications of the findings are discussed. Taken together, the findings demonstrate the critical potential of extending a social representations approach to issues of political psychological significance.