Compromise and Disagreement

Modern society is characterised by disagreement and pluralism, and it is largely this fact that makes politics necessary. In the contemporary world, political institutions and laws must coordinate the actions of millions of people who disagree at many different levels. Liberal theory has traditionally focused on disagreement between different conceptions of the good and more recently on disagreement about justice. But disagreement might also concern facts: Is global warming caused by human activity? Or the means: Which institutions best secure freedom of religion? What are the best means for protecting the climate? And when we agree on fundamental issues, e.g. human rights or protecting the climate, we often disagree on which institutions at the national and international level ought to promote them: How should the three branches of government relate to each other? Which role should international or global institutions play? Thus, a political theory that aims to be realistic in terms of beginning from the fact of disagreement cannot merely see disagreement as a result of human self-interest, nor should it see disagreement merely as a matter of disagreement on ends or justice. Citizens disagree in good faith at many different levels – and so do political theorists and philosophers.

If disagreement makes politics necessary, what makes it possible? Are there principles at a higher level of abstraction that transcend our disagreements? Are there ways of coming to agreement that all can (or that all ought to) accept? Are democratic comprises uniquely and properly tailored to deal with a political reality characterized by disagreement? Is compromise formation equally valid at all levels and for all forms of disagreement?

REGISTRATION
Please register by sending an email to psj301[@]alumni.ku.dk. Registration deadline for non-presenters is March 1, 2015.