> What's important, as Justin keeps emphasizing, is a good method
> for adjudicating between people with different moral beliefs and
> practical objectives.
would the method be derived from a shared set of beliefs and objectives?
* * *
What else? Yes, this requires some shared agreement. But that must be very minimal and not presuppose any controversial beliefs about what is good, or any metaphysics of the self. It has to be superficial, shallow, uncontroversial, lowest common denominator. Acceptance of democratic procedures for making decisions, respect for law (including the beliefs that judges will follow it whatever their personal moral beliefs), and acceptance of basic civil and political rights -- that's pretty widely shared.
jks
--------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <../attachments/20040901/3bd4d21d/attachment.htm>