Quite. It's why this is the one I stick with. Besides, I learn things.
> It does
> (has the potential for?) nurture practices that, as
> those who study civil
> society argue, prepare us for a day when we really
> might have all kinds of
> radical self-governance. Don't you need, under such
> conditions, to be able
> to, not just tolerate others 'opinions,characters,
> ethics,e tc.? but learn
> how to work with them _productively_.
That would be nice. Goes for me too. I've learned something about civility, some from here.
>
> substantive democracy, not procedural democracy.
Here's an example of a differencxe. I have no ide what substantive democracy would be be. I mean, apart from reducing inequalities of wealth, and increasing the amount of time and education people who are so inclinedw ould have to participate in democratic procedures.
our
> procedural democracy,
> now, is an attempt to evade the sticky issue of how
> to deal with difference
> productively. its guiding principle is: "we'll never
> come to agreement, so
> we'll just have rules for adjudicating disagreement.
> as long as we follow
> the rules, it's fair. the ends of the good society
> aren't up for discussion."
Exactly. Liberealism in a nutshell. Beautifully put. Rawls himself couldn't have said it better. I think this is almost a necessary truth. Kells, you think it is a problem to be solved. We'll discuss later.
jks
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com