Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10077/12701
Title: RELIGIONE, RISPETTO E GUERRA: CONTRO LA VISIONE CANONICA DELLA RELIGIONE IN POLITICA
Authors: Eberle, Christopher
Keywords: Religious reasonssecular reasonsjustified coercionrespectwar
Issue Date: 9-May-2016
Publisher: EUT Edizioni Università di Trieste
Source: Christopher Eberle, "RELIGIONE, RISPETTO E GUERRA: CONTRO LA VISIONE CANONICA DELLA RELIGIONE IN POLITICA", in: "Etica & Politica / Ethics & Politics (2016) XVIII/1", Trieste, EUT Edizioni Università di Trieste, 2016, pp. 11-33
Series/Report no.: Etica & Politica / Ethics & Politics
(2016) XVIII/1
Abstract: 
The last several decades have witnessed a vibrant discussion about the proper political role of religion in pluralistic liberal democracies. An important part of that discussion has been a dispute about the role that religious and secular reasons properly play in the justification of state coercion. As I understand it, the standard view advocated by the members of that pantheon, and by many others as well, includes the following two claims, namely, that reli-gious reasons cannot play a decisive role in justifying state coercion and that citizens and public officials in a liberal polity should not endorse state coercion that requires decisive re-ligious support. I am skeptical about the standard view’s restrictions on religious reasons as a class – restrictions that apply to any and all religious considerations, to religious reasons as such. My main aim in this paper is to motivate skepticism regarding the standard view. I will try to achieve this aim by reflecting on what I take to be the paradigmatic case of state coercion, namely, the use of military violence in war.
Type: Book Chapter
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10077/12701
ISSN: 1825-5167
Appears in Collections:Etica & Politica / Ethics & Politics (2016) XVIII/1

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat
EBERLE.pdf228.37 kBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open
Show full item record


CORE Recommender

Page view(s) 50

570
checked on Oct 1, 2022

Download(s) 50

301
checked on Oct 1, 2022

Google ScholarTM

Check


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons