In:
Philosophy & Social Criticism, SAGE Publications, Vol. 49, No. 3 ( 2023-03), p. 289-308
Abstract:
In the last couple of years, increased attention has been directed at the question of whether there is such a thing as a distinctively political normativity. With few exceptions, this question has so far only been explored by political realists. However, the discussion about a distinctively political normativity raises methodological and meta-theoretical questions of general importance for political theory. Although the terminology varies, it is a widely distributed phenomenon within political theory to rely on a normative source which is said to be political rather than moral, or at least foremost political. In light of this concern, the present paper moves beyond political realism in the attempt to explore alternative ways of understanding distinctively political normativity, in a way which may be useful for political theorists. More specifically, we investigate two candidate views, here labelled the “domain view” and the “role view,” respectively. The former traces distinctness to the “domain,” that is, to the circumstances of politics. This view has gained a lot of support in the literature in recent years. The latter traces distinctness to “role,” that is, the role-specific demands that normative-political principles make. Our twofold claim in this paper is that the domain view is problematic but that the role view is promising.
Type of Medium:
Online Resource
ISSN:
0191-4537
,
1461-734X
DOI:
10.1177/01914537221131576
Language:
English
Publisher:
SAGE Publications
Publication Date:
2023
detail.hit.zdb_id:
134004-9
detail.hit.zdb_id:
1475387-X
SSG:
5,1
