Liberalism

1
Liberalism
The basic suppositions (1) Liberals believe that
people naturally desire individual freedom to
pursue happiness (happiness is often defined in
terms of property and autonomy),
(2) Liberals believe that people are naturally
independent of one another--societies are
artificial institutions. There is a great deal
of talk in the liberal tradition about the state
of nature and whether or not it is a state of
war. Some (like Thomas Hobbes) argue that our
individualism in the state of nature leads to
incessant fighting and lives that are nasty,
brutish, and short. Others (like John Locke)
argue that the state of nature is perfectly
blissful though it limits our productive
capacities. In either case, society is an
artificial institution of contractual obligations
whose origins lie not in human nature but in the
progress of civilization.
(3) Liberals believe that people are disposed
towards pleasing themselves first and foremost.
For the true liberal, we are all selfish.
Liberal ethics typically have to explain altruism
in terms of self-satisfaction or long-term gain.
(4) Liberals tend to doubt any sense that one
morality or code of conduct should govern us all.
To each his own, provided that he doesnt get in
the way of mine.
2
Liberalism
Liberals on the Truth Unlike civic humanism or
foundationalism, liberalism has not been
consistently associated with an epistemology.
Liberals have taken up
Realism the belief that what we perceive (both
things, like a pair-bond, and categories, like
love) is an adequate if not accurate image of the
world. Rationalism the belief that careful
reasoning through abstract formulas will lead to
truth about a matter. Empiricism the belief that
our knowledge derives from tests and theorums
that try to approximate and predict an
independent world.
Probably the most enduring connection between
liberalism and any theory of what constitutes
truth is the connection between liberalism and
rational judgment. Liberals tend to believe
that, since all people are self-serving,
autonomous creatures, we share a sense of what is
reasonable. The liberal may question the value of
sharing a tradition, though s/he will rarely
question the value of sharing a rational
capacity. This is typically
Calculating--preferably in a quantifiable
sense.Utilitarian--what is reasonable is most
useful for the greatest population.Instrumental--
rationality can help us to think about how to
accomplish what we desire, but it is of no use
when trying to determine what we should desire.
You can rationally think about the best way to
enjoy or acquire key-lime pie. You cannot
rationally explain a desire for key-lime pie.
3
Liberalism
Liberals on the Good Life Liberals are rarely
willing to take strong positions on what people
should desire. Individual taste is a matter of
private concern. This aspect of the liberal
tradition has led many classical conservatives
(and civic humanists) to label liberals moral
relativists. This charge, however, is not
entirely fair. Liberals are willing to take
strong positions on how people should go about
acquiring what they desire competitively,
aggressively, perhaps even hedonistically.
An ethics without morality? In the end, the good
life for the liberal is the open space of free
contract and exchange where people are allowed to
pursue whatever suits their fancy provided that
said pursuit does not impinge on anothers
capacity to freely pursue her desires.
A thin theory of justice. The emphasis on
tradition and virtue provides civic humanists
with a thick theory of justice. Shared values,
traditions, moral precepts--these are all part of
justice and the debate about justice in the civic
humanist tradition. The emphasis on
individuality in the liberal tradition takes
these resources away. The liberal theory of
justice is thin insofar as its based on
protecting the individual from encroachment by
others. If civic humanism is founded on a notion
of virtue, liberalism comes after virtue.
4
Liberalism
Liberals on Good Government Liberals tend to
champion the regulatory state, a negative,
backwards-looking apparatus whose principal
function is to preserve our ability to pursue our
own individual liberties without the encroachment
of others. In comparison to civic humanists, who
have been known to expand the role of government
into nearly every crevice of human existence,
liberals tend to restrict the role of government.
So how did liberalism become synonymous with big
government As societies grow more complicated,
peoples ability to get in one anothers way
increases. More complicated societies require
more regulation. More regulation requires more
government. In the early 20th century, a host
of liberal political theorists calling themselves
progressives argued that only a robust
regulatory state able to care for certain aspects
of citizens lives (including retirement,
utilities, transportation, education) could
ensure every individuals ability to pursue his
or her own individual freedom. U.S. statism,
therefore, was justified with reference to
liberal political theory. Since the 1970s,
however, liberalism has been used to argue for
smaller government, less statism, even less
regulation.
5
Liberalism
Liberals on governments role in public
discourse Just as liberalism has been marshaled
in the service of statism and deregulation, so
has liberalism been used to argue for greater
freedom of speech and greater regulation of
speech.
Liberalism on the side of freedom of speech If
the United States has a rhetorical tradition
etched in law its preservation of the 1st
amendment in as broad a sense as the text can be
interpreted. The public sphere should be a place
where anyone can say anything s/he wishes.
Liberalism on the side of regulation of speech
Just as liberalism leads us to champion the
speakers ability to say what s/he wants to say,
it also leads us to champion the audiences right
not to be imposed upon by undesirable speech.
Liberals have argued that citizens have a right
not to have advertisements pushed on them at
every opportunity. Such arguments lead to
regulations on the placement and sometimes the
content of certain speech. Liberals have also
argued that citizens have the right not to have
to hear hateful, threatening, or offensive
speech. Hate-speech codes and laws against
threatening an individual arise from such
dispositions.
6
Liberalism
The Liberal and the Civic Humanist Public
Spheres, a Comparison Since liberals and civic
humanists differ in their fundamental beliefs
about citizen capacity, human nature, and
knowledge formation, they disagree about what
public argument should look like.
The Liberal Public Sphere is Limited Liberals
tend to define very few issues as public
issues. Public argument is limited to those
concerns that have the ability to curtail
peoples individual liberty. Sexuality,
religion, eating habits, even contracts that only
affect the parties immediately involved--these
are all private concerns.
Liberals Tend to Champion Rhetorical Originality
over Accommodation While the civic humanist
obligates the responsible rhetor to consider all
sides of a debate and to cater her argument to
the interests and the knowledge of the audience,
the liberal only obligates the rhetor to state a
unique and innovative position, a position that
s/he believes to be true. Some have argued that
liberalism, at its worst, leads to shouting
matches in which participants try to stake out a
claim.
Liberals tend to Champion Reason over Tradition
Since liberals tend to believe that people share
a rational (interested) faculty, they tend to
favor arguments that appeal to that faculty
rather than arguments that appeal to some
longstanding sense of right.
7
Liberalism
The Liberal and the Civic Humanist Public
Spheres, a Comparison
Liberals Tend to Favor Iconoclasts over
Traditionalists Since traditions tend to hamper
the individual pursuit of freedom, liberals tend
to favor rhetors who avoid appeals to tradition.
Liberals tend to favor arguments that appeal to
abstract reason, to principal, or to empirically
determined fact.
Liberals Tend to Favor Methods of Invention that
Depend on Individual Reason or Empirical
Investigation Since liberals tend to believe
that (1) everyone is an autonomous actor, and (2)
everyone in interested, they are constantly
vigilant about bias, and they are constantly on
the lookout for a perspective free of bias.
Since reason is common and disinterested, it
merits everyones consideration. Since empirical
investigation also operates free from bias, it
deserves our attention. Appeals to cultural
norms, maxims, mores, and laws, however, risk
perpetuating the biases of those who drafted or
adhered to these institutions.
Liberals tend to be Skeptical of Those who Argue
without Being Convinced of their Argument For
the liberal, arguing in bad faith principally
means arguing insincerely. The autonomous
rational individual should arrive at what s/he
believes independent of bias, and s/he should
argue that position carefully. To do otherwise
is to misrepresent oneself. While civic
humanists nearly expect the good rhetor to
regularly argue from positions with which s/he
disagrees, liberals see this practice as
duplicitous.