__________________________________________________
Call for Papers "Confronting Cultural Diversity: Values, Outcomes and Procedures" International Workshop in Political Theory Manchester Metropolitan University Manchester (UK) 10-12 September 2008 __________________________________________________ Conveners: Emanuela Ceva (Institute for Advanced Study, Pavia) Enzo Rossi (Social Ethics Research Group, University of Wales, Newport) The management of cultural diversity is one of the major challenges of contemporary liberal-democratic theory. A tension is often highlighted between two central commitments of modern liberal democracies: the protection of individual rights and the equal treatment of all citizens on the one side, and the safeguard and respect of personal and group-based cultural specificities on the other side. What is more, the relative ease with which certain (mainly Western and progressive) values and conceptions of the good life can be accommodated within a liberal-democratic political framework is often contrasted with the difficulties encountered by other (mainly non-Western and traditional) cultural instances. This discrepancy is then invoked to call into question the whole-heartednessas it wereof liberal-democratic egalitarianism and universalism, thus casting doubt on the normative cornerstones of the edifice of the modern liberal-democratic polity. Recent developments in normative political theory and cognate fields offer two contrasting ways of tackling the challenges of ethical diversity, namely substantivism and proceduralism. The former approach confronts diversity by grounding political authority in the substantial values and benefits promoted by political arrangements that accommodate the conflicting values and interests at stake; the latter approach addresses the problems of diversity by making the justness of institutions depend upon the fairness of the procedures used for the adjudication of conflicts of values. The difference between the two approaches may also be couched in terms of a contrast between teleological and deontological accounts of the normative foundations of liberalism. This workshop aims to compare and contrast substantivist and proceduralist approaches to the problem of cultural diversity, and to explore the possibility of synergies between them. What are the relative advantages and disadvantages of each approach, from a theoretical, historical and/or policy-oriented perspective? Is pure proceduralism the only alternative to substantivism, or would it be possible/desirable to endorse more "nuanced" approaches? If you would like to present a paper at this workshop, please send a 500-word abstract (or a full paper) to <[email protected]> and <[email protected]> by April 30, 2008. We welcome contributions from the fields of ethics, political philosophy/theory, history of political thought, law, and social policy. __________________________________________________ InterPhil List Administration: http://interphil.polylog.org Intercultural Philosophy Calendar: http://cal.polylog.org
