IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/polstu/v45y1997i2p296-311.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Metaphysics Postponed: Liberalism, Pluralism, and Neutrality

Author

Listed:
  • Glen Newey

Abstract

Many recent liberal theorists have argued that state neutrality is supported by a metaphysical thesis about value, namely pluralism, which asserts that there are some conceptions of the good life which neither form a hierarchy nor represent versions of a single good. It is however doubtful whether neutrality is supported by pluralism; indeed, it may in some cases be precluded by it. Arguments for pluralism can, in many cases, be reconciled with a monistic metaphysics of value, and pluralism itself fails to support neutrality. This is particularly true of traditional liberal policy positions such as religious toleration and opposition to censorship, where attention to diverse conceptions of the good may favour, or demand, non–neutral policies. The political problems which neutrality addresses arise before we accept the metaphysical ‘truth’ of pluralism, and often remain even if the parties to a political conflict have false conceptions of value. A sharp question for the pluralist neutralist is why conflicting conceptions of the political cannot themselves feature in plural conceptions of the good life. Dispensing with pluralism may not, however, be enough to rescue neutrality, since the disputes which neutrality was designed to deal with may not be resolvable neutrally; and more particularly, some of the traditional liberal policies may be incapable of neutral justification. If so, liberals may find a more traditional form of non–neutral liberalism more attractive.

Suggested Citation

  • Glen Newey, 1997. "Metaphysics Postponed: Liberalism, Pluralism, and Neutrality," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 45(2), pages 296-311, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:polstu:v:45:y:1997:i:2:p:296-311
    DOI: 10.1111/1467-9248.00082
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9248.00082
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1467-9248.00082?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Emanuela Ceva & Gideon Calder, 2009. "Values, Diversity and the Justification of EU Institutions," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 57(4), pages 828-845, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:polstu:v:45:y:1997:i:2:p:296-311. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0032-3217 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.