Democracies are systems in which the voice of all is heard through means of equal representation. Yet, although democracies strive to achieve fairness and neutrality there are various instances in which this social norm is not achieved. John Rawls’ intended on explaining thoroughly the ability to reach neutrality in society through two paths, one being a public reason and the other overlapping consensus. Through this analysis, John Rawls interpretations and language will be fragmented in order to reach unanimity between these concepts of overlapping consensus and public reason, but to be able to do that we must fully comprehend what are comprehensive doctrines through the readings of John Rawls from the text named, “Political Liberalism”.
John Rawls refers to public reason as the common reason for people living in a pluralist society. A pluralist society is a society that lives under the philosophical concept of pluralism. The concept is a type of democracy that is often seen as fair and just (Rawls 11). It is an acknowledgment and affirmation of diversity within a country or society, which allows people to coexist peacefully despite their different conviction, cultures, and interests. Rawls continues to state that it is justifying a particular stand or position through reasons that diverse people can accept. Through public reason, people are able to justify their political stands through various public values and standards. For example, in today’s society, gay marriage is a law. Had the Supreme Court refuted the law based on biblical opinions it would violate public opinion because not everyone is a Christian. The Supreme Court evaluate the arguments made in favor of the law and decided the evidence is sufficient. The Bible, in the book of Leviticus, clearly condemns same-sex marriage but that applies only to Christian believers. The society is not only made up of Christians, we have pagans and atheists. Hence the Leviticus law is not common. In a brief summary, the Rawls’ principle of public reason can be shortened to mean that, people who are affianced in firm political actions have an obligation to civility to explain and validate they decision based on essential politically aware matters by use of public principles and standards (Rawls 489). Such political activities include voting. Public values are values that relate to equality and freedom of people in a given society like gender equality and freedom of speech. They are values that can be passed down, generation after generation. Public standards are principles of reasoning that govern a society. They are common facts that are known by everyone in a given society.
Overlapping consensus refers to how supporters of different ideologies see eye to eye on certain matters due to particular principles of justice. Overlapping consensus can occur despite irreconcilable differences. The parties involved will only have to refrain from political disputes over fundamental disagreements. John Rawls explains that overlapping consensus on principles of fairness is a moral notion that is maintained by moral thinking (Rawls 164). In a liberal society, political power is used legitimately in accordance with a political commencement of justice. According to Rawls’ overlapping consensus is a hope for social stability. Through the overlapping system, people approve a set of laws for various reasons. Each person in a given society supports a political notion of justice for reasons that can only one can comprehend. For example, the Vatican Council of the Catholic Church states that every person has a right and freedom of religion. It means that one can worship whomever they believe in. It also means people are allowed to defend their beliefs freely without judgment or persecution. That Catholic doctrine supports the constitutional right to freedom of worship. When other religions support this ideology, overlapping consensus occurs. They all support the same idea even though it is for different reasons. Rawls says overlapping consensus brings about stability in a free society. Stability in an overlapping consensus is greater than a sheer balance of power among citizens who have different opinions and views. He refers to power balance as (modus vivendi) and when the power of social stability shifts the balance is also lost (Rawls 147). He argues that overlapping consensus is stable because each person identifies with a certain moral doctrine. He says that if each citizen is allowed to air their views and beliefs they can be comfortable with following them compared to following laws that have been forced upon them.
John Rawls acknowledges that the modern democratic society is not only categorized by a pluralism of comprehensive religion, philosophical and moral doctrines but also a pluralism of unsuited yet sensible all-inclusive doctrines (Rawls 170). Citizens do not affirm by such doctrines and nobody should expect that they will anytime soon in the future. He identifies that the modern society is not based on the agreement around key values or issues rather persons contrast in their obligation to rights and justice. Rawls questions how possible it is for a society that has reasonable differences to live together and support the idea of a constitutional regime. In an attempt to answer such questions, he says the liberal state is a neutral system of law because people can pursue their own detached and irreconcilable ideas of what is right and wrong. It is a system that does not favor one over the other. John Rawls says that an overlapping consensus together with the help of good use of public reason offers the best way to realize and uphold neutrality. He supports this by stating that public reason does not attack any comprehensive doctrine, which a part of the overlapping consensus is also. He refers to this idea as neutral, fair and impartial.
The idea of a liberal state brings in the concept of neutrality but he argues that it is not enough on its own (Rawls 192). This is because the idea of good and right need the intercession of the state of implementation. For example, when two groups argue and each side relentlessly holds on to their opinion without a second thought, a third party neutral person will have to intervene and solve the problem. The neutral person must find a common ground on which the two groups will agree. This way he/she will have applied public reason as well as overlapping consensus.
However, neutrality is not enough, the solution should be fair therefore one needs to add a commitment to democratic, constitutional measures as being the moral compass when it comes to legislation about issues of conflict based on fundamental dissimilarities about what is right and good (Rawls 194). Basically, this draws down to a second-order pledge that each citizen needs to share. When policy matters arise that lead to insightful disagreement among the groups of citizens, the right solution, and the correct solution arrived at through legitimate democratic processes. This means that every citizen is required to put their obligation to authentic democratic measures ahead of their commitment to a specific idea of the good and right. Democratic values supplant religious, political, and moral opinions when there is no choice but to authorize an issue. Citizens are allowed to debate their case for or against suggested regulation. However, they are then morally indebted to accept the constitutionally selected result as an appropriate resolution of the issue.
Rawls argues that public reason and overlapping consensus are neutral, fair and impartial because they revolve around the concept of toleration (Rawls 123). Toleration is the ability to bear with other people’s opinions even though one does not agree with them. It is the idea that people living in one society should tolerate and respect each other’s opinions and beliefs. It translates to political processes such as elections for example. One should not enforce their beliefs and political ideologies to other citizens. One should respect the political party that another person supports. The use of public reason and the overlapping consensus is fair because everyone’s opinion is heard (Rawls 201). Everyone has a voice and it is democratic. In most cases, democracy applies to the majority rules concept but Rawls questions the stability of the society when laws are forced on the citizens.
Rawls refers to justice as fairness. The use of public reason and overlapping consensus brings impartialness towards different comprehensive doctrines. This is because many liberal societies have different beliefs and an overlapping consensus is crucial for such a society. In fact, Rawls believes it is needed to achieve social stability in a free society. Public reason allows people to express their beliefs in public but overlapping consensus ensures that they do not forcefully inflict their beliefs on others. Fairness, neutrality, and impartialness can only be achieved by equality. The theory of John Rawls stands for equality and embracing diversity in societies.
Works Cited
Rawls, John. Political Liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press, 2005. Internet resource.