Morale ou démocratie: Retour vers le débat Rawls- Habermas

CHOUAR, Soundous

doi:10.21608/ijdjl.2023.239922.1230

Morale ou démocratie: Retour vers le débat Rawls- Habermas

Document Type : Original Article

Author

Soundous CHOUAR

French language, foreign languages , ENS-Setif , Algeria

10.21608/ijdjl.2023.239922.1230

Abstract

This article highlights the philosophical background of the historical debate between Rawls and Habermas in 1995, and the direction taken by the philosophy of law after this debate.

The author, Bjarn Malkevik, opened his essay with two detailed issues: Rawls's « Moral Foundation » and Habermas's « Communicative Sovereignty ».

The « Moral Foundation » of Rawls is based on « Moral Intuitiveness », and on « Rational tradition ».

Rawls defines « Moral Intuitiveness » as moral norms that impose upon us, while « Rational tradition » is a set of political principles derived from liberal culture, and should exist in the structure of government, judicial and parliamentary institutions.

The author then addressed the issue of Habermas’s « communicative sovereignty » which is incompatible with the « Moral Foundation » of Rawls.

Communicative sovereignty is based on forms of rhetorical communication about opinion and will. Rhetorical communication is regulated by the "ethics of discussion"; and leads to "democratic self-legislation". Habermas means that citizens are present in the various procedures of their choice of standards, laws and institutions.

The author raised also the question of the « Public Reason », which is meant « Moral and political values governing the democratic and constitutional government's relations with and among citizens », and how it is incarnated according to Rawls and Habermas.

He achieved his article by addressing the question of legality and legitimacy, outlining the gaps of Rawls' philosophy and calling for the democratic right that he sees as the most appropriate choice of current challenges.

Keywords