The core idea shared by all cosmopolitan views is that all human \;beings belong to a single community and the ultimate units of moral \;concern are individual human beings\, not state or particular forms of \;human associations. Nevertheless\, a political theory of \;cosmopolitanism should confront questions regarding the possibility \;of a cosmopolitan project in the alleged post-metaphysical and \;post-universalistic theoretical framework: How can one justify \;cosmopolitan values without falling back on some conceptions of a \;fixed human nature or a shared system of belief? How are the \;cosmopolitan norms legitimated by those envisaged by these norms? How \;is the authority of the cosmopolitan norms created and maintained?
In the most influential recent political theories with an \;incontestable cosmopolitan potential\, the metaphysical objectivity of \;the alleged universal values has been replaced by the intersubjective \;validity attainable through discursive practices and dialogue\, which \;involves &ldquo\;reasoning from the point of view of other&rdquo\;\, and reasonable \;agreement. This approach finds its clearest elaborations in J. \;Rawls&rsquo\;s public reason\, J.Habermas&rsquo\; ideal speech situation and \;communication action\, D. Held&rsquo\;s layered cosmopolitanism as a mix of \;regulative principles and hermeneutic complexity\, S. Benhabib&rsquo\;s \;cosmopolitanism as &lsquo\;democratic iterations&rsquo\;\, in J. Bohman&rsquo\;s &ldquo\;global \;democratic minimum&rdquo\;\, J. Dryzek&rsquo\;s &lsquo\;discursive practices&rsquo\; and others. \;Concomitantly\, the intersubjective validity attainable through \;discourse and deliberation attempts to offer solutions to the \;legitimacy questions through public justification\, which is the key \;idea in contemporary liberal-democratic political theory\, and which \;means that no regime is legitimate unless it is reasonable from every \;individual's point of view. In addition\, public deliberation is \;considered to be an effective tool for promoting transparency\, \;enabling those affected by decisions to see why and how they were \;made\, contributing to greater accountability.
Therefore\, from the perspective of legitimating cosmopolitan norms\, \;deliberative practices and cosmopolitanism could be considered as \;being complementary. Agents of deliberation can be state \;representatives\, NGOs (including corporations and civil society \;groups)\, and\, mainly\, individual citizens. Potentially\, deliberative \;democracy includes\, in a deliberation\, all persons\, &lsquo\;all those \;affected&rsquo\;\, irrespective of the place. This focus of individual \;citizens constitutes the &lsquo\;hard core&rsquo\; of both cosmopolitanism and \;deliberative democracy. Nevertheless\, with its \; emphasis on \;&ldquo\;reasonable agreement&rdquo\;\, &ldquo\;overlapping consensus&rdquo\; &ldquo\;reasons that all can \;accept&rdquo\;\, the discursive justification of norms risks either to \;postulate a global consensus through the attempts to justify the \;universality of cosmopolitanism or to re-affirm the importance of the \;nation-state\, where the conditions for deliberation could be more \;easy obtained\, thus falling back into &lsquo\;methodological \;nationalism&rsquo\; (U. Beck)\, which assumes that humanity is divided \;irrevocably into a given number of nations.
Objectives
The aims of the workshop are to examine the cosmopolitan potential of \;deliberative democracy and to see if the cosmopolitan political \;theory and deliberative democracy are interrelated \;approaches in \;conceiving post-universalist\, non-metaphysical cosmopolitanism. Our \;main purpose is to see if deliberative democracy helps to elaborate a \;non-foundationalist concept of cosmopolitanism\, which will not rely \;on the assumptions of global agreement and consensus\, but which will \;explore the dynamics of disagreement and the cosmopolitan potential \;of critique.
Questions
Organizational details
Please submit an abstract (300-500 words) no later than September 2\, \;2012 to tcaraus@nec.ro> or/and tamara_caraus@yahoo.com>. Please also \;include a separate cover sheet indicating your name\, professional \;status (faculty\, graduate student\, independent researcher\, etc.)\, and \;institutional affiliation. Papers may be of a length suitable for a \;peer-reviewed journal article. Decision notices will be emailed by \;September 16\, 2012. The deadline for submission of full paper is \;November 2\, 2012. The organizers provide accommodation and meals. In \;exceptional cases\, travel expenses may be reimbursed. For further \;details or questions\, please contact tcaraus@nec.ro> or/and \;tamara_caraus@yahoo.com>.
This activity is part of the project Critical Foundations of Contemporary Cosmopolitanism \;supported by a grant of the Romanian \;National Authority for Scientific Research\, CNCS-UEFISCDI (code: \;PN-II-RU-TE-2011-3-0218\, contract nr. \;98/05.10.2011): \;http://www.nec.ro/fundatia/proiecte/p98.htm