Dissertation
Liberal Politics and Public Faith: A Philosophical Reconciliation
Defense: May, 2011
Committee: Gerald Gaus (Chair), David Schmidtz, Thomas Christiano, Steven Wall, Christopher Eberle (external), Nicholas Wolterstorff (external)
Full copy here. Please do not cite without permission.
Abstract (Extended Abstract)
Political philosophers widely assume that public reason liberalism is hostile to religious contributions to liberal politics. My dissertation argues that this assumption is a mistake. Properly understood, public reason liberalism does not privilege religious or secular reasoning; a compelling conception of public reason liberalism can balance the claims of secular citizens and citizens of faith. I develop a framework that can resolve the tensions between liberalism and faith not only at a theoretical level but in the practical matters of dialogue, public policy, institutional design and constitutional law.
A Teaser (from the Introduction)
The wedding of liberalism and secularism has alienated millions of Americans from the liberal tradition. To many, liberalism is identified with an aggressive secularization of social institutions, especially public media and public schools. Many citizens of faith believe liberalism threatens their most sacred forms of life. This was not always the case: in American history, the relation between liberalism and religion has often been one of mutual respect and support. Mutual respect has given way to mutual suspicion. Liberalism’s proponents and detractors believe that liberal political theory requires eliminating religious influences in public life. This dissertation defends a bold thesis: liberalism has no such implications. One we see why this is so, the philosophical underpinnings of the liberalism-religion conflict are undermined. Unlike most work on this topic, the dissertation neither defends liberal secularism nor assaults it. Instead, it integrates the moral emphases of both the religious and liberal perspectives.