REASON AND BELIEFS. RATIONALITY, PUBLIC REASON AND EDUCATION IN A MULTICULTURAL SOCIETY

PROJECT DEVELOPED WITHIN THE FACULTY OF PHILOSOPHY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF BUCHAREST

PROJECT FINANCED BY THE NATIONAL RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT AND INNOVATION PLAN, PN II IDEI CNCSIS CODE 951

Within nowadays philosophical research, the relationship between reason and beliefs represents one of the most complex and actual interdisciplinary themes, encompassing the history of philosophy, metaphysics, social and political philosophy, philosophy of action, philosophy of mind, philosophy of religion etc. The frameworks of these themes are determined, on the one hand by John Locke’s famous distinction between reason and faith, as two different and contrary manners of making claims about the validity of knowledge, and on the other hand by Kant’s distinction between knowledge (Wissen),conviction (Meinung) and opinion (Glaube), by means of which, ever since Kant, knowledge has been replaced by scientific knowledge (and the metaphysics in a classical meaning has been rejected). Leaving these classical tenets that oppose reason to opinion and/or conviction, and create a hierarchy between true knowledge, conviction and opinion, within the contemporary philosophical research there is a more and more increasingly interest taken in the study of the relation between reason and beliefs, whether we take belief in a strong meaning, as promoted by religions, worldviews, ideologies, moral systems etc, or in a weaker meaning, according to which belief is equal to opinion. Quine, for instance, considers that science is a certain type of belief. This interest, highly increasing nowadays, is concretized throughout the world by several directions of research:

- An attempt to reconcile reason and religious faith, but on the grounds of reason (the researches of Nicholas Wolterstorff, Alvin Plantinga, Richard Swinburne, Robert Audi, but also Richard Hare, analytical philosophers who do not see any incompatibility between reason and religious faith and build new arguments for the acceptance of God, affirm that reason does not contradict the belief in God and develop an epistemology of religion).

- An attempt to redefine the nature and boundaries of reason and rationality, according to which the problems of theoretical rationality and of the structure of cognition are discussed in the context of the forming of beliefs and convictions, but also of the way in which the different beliefs, convictions and attitudes structure the grammar of language and thought (Richard Strawson, W.V.O. Quine, Donald Davidson, van Fraassen, Jerry Fodor, David Papineau). We believe that Bayesianism (Frank Ramsey, Bruno de Fineti, Leonard J.Savage) can be integrated in this direction too, as it aims at the unification of the epistemic and practical theories of the rationality based on  the principle of mathematical anticipation (the strength of the convictions can be measured) and the construction of a theory of the  learning of beliefs and convictions, highly interesting in the context of the theme of this project, as well as the different projects that show the importance of the emotional factor in the constitution and functioning of reason (Antonio Damasio). On the same level, a highly complex approach is that of the epistemic logic (Nicholas Rescher, Saul Kripke).

- An attempt to rethink the concept of reason, in which the discussions concerning the procedural and content aspects (substantive rationality) bring forward again Humean suggestions that cast a new light upon the relation between reason and practical rationality (Richard Brandt, Bernard Williams, Elisabeth Anscombe). In this kind of attempts, in the various technical variants that can be identified, the rationality of the agent is the basic assumption of the moral argument: the theory of rational decision (John Harsanyi, David Gauthier, Michael Resnik), the theory of rational choice, the theories of economical rationality and the theory of games (Keneth Arrow, Robert Axelrod, Brian Barry, Anthony Downs, Jon Elster, James M. Buchanan, Mancur Olson).

Our project continues a line of research in which reason and rationality are defined by their relation to norms. To be rational is to follow rules. This line of research is represented by philosophers that are quite different and have different interests (John Rawls, Jürgen Habermas, Michael Sandel, Alasdair MacIntyre, Charles Taylor, Richard Rorty, Hillary Putnam, Michael Walzer), but who consider that philosophy is responsible for the entire problematic of knowledge and of the orientation in the world. This starting point will allow us to try a series of junctions with some of the other branches of philosophical research, some of them even highly specialized, such as epistemology of religion and epistemic logic.

The project we propose follows the direction of thought of Rawls – Habermas, it is inscribed in the framework of political and moral philosophy and focuses on the concept of public reason, a concept inherited from Kant that plays an important part in Rawls’ later work and in the most recent writings of Habermas. Rawls and Habermas have equally claimed a Kantian origin for their theories of social justice and the theory of communicative action, and have advanced their theories as a foundation for the accomplishment of a stable and rational society in the conditions of post-modernity, on the basis of a new understanding of the concept of public reason. For, as it seems, post-modernity modifies the homogeneous structure of the domain of applicability of the classical concepts of practical reason cut out to fit a homogeneous society able to be organized according to universal rules. In a multicultural society, values are different, relative and express particular points of view. The cultural map of the contemporary society is kaleidoscopic: cultures overlap, influence each other, change their configuration and, at the same time, open themselves and isolate themselves. One could even say that there isn’t just one reason and just one form of rationality. Could we accept, therefore, in the name of cultural specificity, the violation of the human rights, the exploitation of children or any kind of repression? Which is the way to make possible an agreement between opposite worldviews which originate from opposite and irreducible values and visions?

In Rawls’ and Habermas’ fundamental works it is clearly pointed out that the public reason in the most important way of answering these kind of questions and others alike. As reason is the one that imposed the preservation of the cultural diversity of societies, and led to tolerance and the defence of human rights, once again it is called forth to offer grounds and means of making possible the existence of a society in which this diversity can exist without insoluble conflicts.

The concept of public reason will be the central concept of our approach, too. Thus, we come in a line of research that includes the specific contributions of philosophers like Bruce Ackerman, David Gauthier, Onora O’Neill, Seyla Benhabib, Gerald Gaus, Thomas Nagel, Charles Larmore, Fred d’Agostino, Christine M. Korsgaard, Lawerence B. Solum, Bruce W. Brower, Gerald J. Postema etc. These contributions can be found in articles from the most important journals of philosophy and of political and moral philosophy from The Journal of Philosophy to Political Theory or San Diego Law Review. Also, the focused discussions around the problem of public reason have been synthesized in a special issue Public Reason (edited by Fred d’Agostino, Gerald Gaus, Dortmouth: Ashgate, 1998) within the series The International Research Library of Philosophy, series edited under the guidance of John Skorupski which groups thematically the most important articles from the journals of philosophy.

The specific contribution of our project will join the trend illustrated by these authors and will consist in a fundamental research with practical ends. Our research will consist in:

a)      the investigation of the theoretical and cognitive assumptions engaged in the discussion about public reason: the theoretical problem of reason and rationality;

b)      the critical examination of the conceptions regarding public reason and the development of a concept of public reason in accordance with the problems that contemporary society and man challenge practical philosophy;

c)      the inter-connection of the results of this investigation and the problematic of the education in a multi-cultural society with the aim of making them operational.

By its first aspect, our project will generate results in the re-analysis of the problematic of the nature of rationality, of its sources, its structure, its telos, and its limits (the fundamental aspect of the research), and concerning its second and third aspects, our project will highlight the conditions of possibility of the public reason in a multi-cultural society, in which the conceptions and the ways of life, although irreducible, have to be harmonized. The great challenge of this relation and which constitutes the novelty of our approach will consist in the fact that we want to extend the discussion about the public reason from the political field, where it is centred, to content aspects that can be capitalized by education. Although we accept the conclusions of several philosophers according to whom the cultures are closed systems, having their own norms and values, our project aims at identifying possible common elements (reductions) by which minimal concordances could be realized. Rawls’ and Habermas’ solutions to this problem suppose a public reason having a procedural nature expressed by political mechanisms (in Rawls’ narrow definition, the public reason is the reason of the political forum, while Habermas’ view it also includes the civic forum).

Our project proposes an answer that leads back to Kant, who defines public reason in relation not only to the state, but also to the formation (die Bildung) and education. Public reason is the reason used by the scholar (the cultivated man) in front of an intellectual public (the cultivated public). From this point of view, our answer doesn’t refer anymore to what rationally fits to all cultures or people (the procedural answer corresponding to the famous concept of overlapping consensus, or to the situation of an ideal discussion of Habermas‘s Idealsprache), but to those minimal formative elements for the exercise of public reason in a multi-cultural society – a kind of return to the aspects of the illuminist content of the public reason as an emancipatory reason. We consider that such a position represents a courageous approach, full of perspectives, especially in the context of a society in which globalization and multiculturalism become everyday aspects of our life. In this society, the industrialization of knowledge and globalization prove to be insufficient for the rationalization of man. But education can play a decisive part. The strength of this challenge, supposed by the retrieval of the role of the education in the practice of public reason, explains the necessity to realize a new synthesis of the fundamental explanations concerning reason and rationality. Therefore, the marks of our project are: the examination of the concept of public reason in the light of the new theories regarding reason and rationality developed in philosophy (this represents the first systematic attempt of this kind), and the extension of the field of applicability of the public reason from the political domain, of the institutional mechanisms, to the domain of formation, of education, as a solution to the problems of a multicultural society (also a first attempt of this kind). And last but not least, as it will be seen in the activities plan, the existence of a complex strategy of access and affirmation of the Romanian philosophical research on an international level.

The objectives of the project

The engagements of our project are both theoretical and practical. The starting premise of the project is that reason, in its public use, is necessary for dealing with the various problems that confront society and culture nowadays. In this sense, the objectives of our project are:

1. To bring a pertinent contribution to the clarification of the concept of public reason by the presentation, comparison and critical analysis of the different positions and theories concerning it.

2. To offer a synthesized a picture of the conceptions regarding the aspects of rationality within specific domains, such as: science, language, economics, evolution, and to identify possible relations with a conception of public reason.

3. To make a comparison between the theories of rational decision, the theories of rational choice and the normative theories of rationality in relation to the concept of public reason and to offer a critical evaluation of their explanatory productivity.

4. To re-evaluate the concept of public reason from the perspective of the new general theories of reason and rationality.

5. To offer a synthesis of the various philosophical conceptions regarding multiculturalism and to investigate the manner in which these conception are related or not to a certain conception regarding public reason.

6. Based on these clarifications, comparisons and re-evaluations, to offer new perspectives of interpreting public reason with the purpose of answering the necessities of a good functioning of a multicultural society, in the context of the preservation of the traditions, of the tolerance and neutrality of the state.

7. To accomplish a theory of public reason so that its applicative mirror extends from the field of political agreement to that of education and formation.

8. To render operational the concept of public reason so that it can be applied to the demands of a multicultural individual formation. Public reason belongs to individuals. Our question concerns not only what is fitted for the political systems and the cultures so that they would offer a framework for the manifestation of public reason, but also what is fitted for the educational systems so that the formation would be made in the spirit of public reason.

To these objectives related to the practical and theoretical aspects of the research are connected a series of strategic objectives aiming at the international visibility of the project that will implicitly be followed during the research. In this sense, the objectives of our project are:

1. To polarize the different preoccupations at a national level around this direction of research, by the formation of a scientific community that would reach the necessary critical mass in order to be recognized on an international level.

2. To create the scientific instruments that are necessary to the constitution of the this community, of an increased interest for this field and of an international recognition by translations into Romanian and from Romanian, work-shops and conferences, as well as an international-level e-journal called Public Reason, ISI accredited.

3. To disseminate the theoretical and practical results of the research on a national and international level by the specific means of the academic community.

4. To render operational the different results of the research and to offer them to the educational factors, on a national and international level, in order to have them evaluated and applied within the educational politics.

5. To create a national debate concerning the problem of public reason as a practical aspect of this project, in the context of the Romanian public life and the configuration of the European Union as a multi-cultural society.

The research methodology

In philosoph y, the research methodology is strongly connected, if not even determined, by the philosophical orientation shared by the researchers. In general, the research methods used are the analytic method and the hermeneutic one. From this perspective, the members of the research team share the analytic conception regarding the research method in philosophy, in the broad meaning of this notion, and their method of research will be: documentation, language analysis, critical discussion, conceptual analysis and reconstruction, textual analysis and comparison, case study, logic formalization and modeling. Because it is one of our goals to publish anthologies of articles, their scientific publishing will be a dimension of the research methodology. In the same context, all the project’s scientific results will be subjected to an internal analysis and discussions, based on critical debates with colleagues from our departments, and will also include discussions with researchers from foreign universities with whom we will collaborate. Another line of research will include the usual methods of project team work: focus group, brainstorming and hypothesis discussion. Because the project also has practical goals, empirical observation and the construction of hypothesis will be part of the research methods. We will apply the international systems of citation and the publishing standards of the scientific articles in international journals. For the young researchers, the apprehension of such methods and the establishment of a research ethos are essential, so that the project will also encompass this aspect.