Interview - Respect, Plurality and Prejudice - podcast

Feminist Legal Studies, 2015

Review of Lene Auestad, Respect, Plurality, and Prejudice. A Psychoanalytical and Philosophical Enquiry into the Dynamics of Social Exclusion and Discrimination. Karnac Books, 2015. Feminist Legal Studies. September 2015.

The principle of respect for persons has been widely regarded as a promising way of coping with issues of social justice which any strategic approach based on mere appeal to principles of distribution of income, wealth and social positions would be unable to frame. In this paper I shall pursue the possibility of addressing respect not only in terms of a theoretical support for the articulation of distributive policies, but also and especially as an object itself of equal distribution. More to the point, I will endeavour to work out a specific model of “respectful treatment” of minority subjects which, if displayed by institutions and their representatives, may prove well-suited to (i) handle claims of recognition related to certain aspects of the identity of those who are issuing the request (e.g. linguistic, ethnic, religious, cultural); (ii) acknowledge the moral authority of the subjects who have advanced such claims. With a view to this goal, I shall illustrate and critically engage with two normative models of equal respect for people: the first one, worked out by I. Carter and called “opacity respect”, is premised on the idea that respecting people requires treating them as endowed with a minimum threshold of empirical agential capacities (what Rawls [1981] would claim “range property”) and holding back from evaluating their varying degrees. The second model, devised by A.E. Galeotti, proposes that showing equal respect for persons requires an individualizing act of recognition, a practice which, “looking into” each individual, takes also collective identity into account. I contend that the above mentioned models can be employed as progressive steps of a possible theoretical path of equal recognition of individuals and, more specifically, of people subscribing to the views and traditions of minority groups.

2020

I would like to extend my deepest gratitude to Elisabetta Galeotti for her willingness to become my supervisor and mentor. I would like to thank her for her helpfulness and for all the comments and valuable advice that she has provided to me. This text would not have been written without her. I would also like to express my thanks to Pavel Dufek, who has been accompanying me throughout my studies. I would like to thank him for his kindness, detailed reading of all my text, and stimulating comments. Without him this text would not have been written. Finally, I would like to sincerely thank Jan Holzer, who guaranteed my doctoral studies and who has been always supportive of me. Additionally, I kindly thank my parents, Ivana and Vladimír, for all their support. It means very much to me. I thank Mirek for his patience and for always standing by me. I thank Vladimír Antonin for his intellectual stimuli and for always leading me to the best results. I also thank my schoolfellows, especially Terka, who has helped me overcome all the difficulties related to doctoral studies. For my grandma who passed away too early. 1.2.2. Non-comprehensive non-perfectionist liberalism 2. Respect as a default moral principle under the conditions of pluralism 2.1. The essentially political level: The justification of coercion for the sake of respect for liberty 2.2. The societal level: Struggles for recognition as struggles for respect 2.3. Recognition respect: The third-person or second-person form? 3. The justification of the exercise of political power and the formation of public reason 3.1. Standards of the justification of political power and its legitimacy 3.2. The principle of respect and the requirement of both the moral and epistemological reasonableness of persons 4. Criticism of the imperative of respect and the dual interpretation of the criterion of reciprocity 4.1. The criterion of reciprocity: The imperative of respect and the role of people's particularities 4.1.1. The convergence approach as a solution? 4.2. The role of the political community and the dual interpretation of the criterion of reciprocity 4.3. Civic friendship and a way to achieve respect at both the essentially political and societal levels 5. Disrespect and misrecognition as a path to radicalization: The case of young Muslims of immigrant origin in France 5.1. Muslim immigration to France: A brief overview 5.1.1. The case of the Kouachi brothers 5.2. Disrespect and misrecognition as reasons for outrage Conclusion 105 Bibliography 109 3 Among others, see Larmore, The Morals of Modernity; Larmore, "The Moral Basis of Political Liberalism"; Larmore, The Autonomy of Morality; Quong, Liberalism without Perfection. 4 Rawls mentions the meaning of the public political culture of democratic society. However, when defining it, he refers solely to political values. Rawls, Political Liberalism, p. 133. See also the first chapter, p. 31. 5 In this context, Kymlicka (but also Margalit and Raz) talks about minority rights. Kymlicka, Multicultural Citizenship; Margalit and Raz, "National Self-Determination."

Presidential talk to the District of Columbia Sociological Society, February 11, 2016. Racism is a common occurrence for members of marginalized groups around the world. Getting Respect is a book that illuminates experiences of racism by comparing three countries with enduring group boundaries: the United States, Brazil, and Israel. This book is the result of a multiyear collaboration between sociologists living on three different continents. We joined forces to gain a better understanding of what racial tensions look like at the ground level from the perspective of the stigmatized.

Patterns of Prejudice, 2021

The four articles that make up this symposium on Tariq Modood’s recent collection, Essays on Secularism and Multiculturalism (2019), are based on a public conversation and research colloquium held at Utrecht University on 18 February 2020. In the first article, Modood introduces the conversation with a statement of his thinking over two decades on the subjects of secularism and multiculturalism. This is followed by responses by Pooyan Tamimi Arab and Ernst van den Hemel and, in the fourth and final article, Modood has the last word. This Academia.edu entry has only my pieces, namely the first and the fourth.

This is to agree with Slife and Reber that the field of psychology has been negatively biased toward theism. However, accusations of bias or prejudice typically presume that with an even assay of available evidence, that such dispositions would be erased. In a world of multiple constructions of reality, morality, and justice, such an assumption is wholly unwarranted. The present article approaches the presence of multiple worlds from a social constructionist perspective. Proposed are a number of arguments to support an approach toward difference that emphasizes transformative dialogue, that is, dialogue among conflicting parties or standpoints that moves toward mutual viability.

Political Theory, 2004

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 2005

Roma Rights 2: 25-32, 2009

2007

This chapter introduces prejudice and social discrimination together with explanations of their causes. After a brief discussion of prejudice at the level of the individual, the chapter focuses mainly on prejudice and social discrimination as intergroup phenomena. We present classic and contemporary intergroup explanations of intergroup conflict such as realistic conflict theory and social identity theory. Furthermore, we introduce basic psychological processes such as social categorization, identification with a social group, group evaluation and group-based emotions, and consider the intergroup motivations regulating intergroup behaviour. The remainder of the chapter presents various approaches explaining when and how prejudice and intergroup conflict can be reduced. 'Catholics are bigots; Protestants are uptight.' 'Women are born to support and maintain the family, they're not cut out for top management positions.' 'Men are not really competent to rear children.' 'Homosexuals should not be parents and cannot raise children in an appropriate way.' 'East Germans are always complaining; they are incompetent.' 'West Germans are arrogant and cold.' 'Muslims are conservative and sexist; they threaten the fundamental values of modern Europe.' What information do we gain from this list of impressions and judgements? Firstly, in all examples, the content of judgement is connected with negative feelings. Secondly, our behaviour towards these groups of people tends to be in line with our judgements and emotions. Given the above statements, female applicants are unlikely to be shortlisted for senior managerial positions. Turkish families are also unlikely to be openly welcomed into new neighbourhoods. Thirdly, our judgements, emotions and behaviours obviously apply to both social groups as a whole and to individual members of the particular group. We approach these 'others' in a generalized way and neglect interindividual differences.