Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Response to Critics

Response to Critics O N P L U R A L I S M A N D L I B E R A L D E M O C R AC Y Richard E. Flathman I am grateful to the several contributors to this symposium I learned from his accounts, but so far as I can see there are no and to the journal editors for arranging it. The commentators are major differences between us. thoughtful and I have learned from them. I will respond briefly, Richard Boyd's article concentrates on my chapter on Michael beginning with Professor Kateb's paper. Oakeshott. Boyd clearly knows Oakeshott very well and I read his Kateb makes valuable distinctions among types of pluralism piece as for the most part complementary to mine. He correctly and argues forcefully that some of the types are mutually observes that I don't do much of anything with the notion, central incompatible. I did attempt a general theory and closer attention to Oakeshott, of civility and civil. That was deliberate. I have to his distinctions would have improved found the recent literature on civil the book. I think the value of the book, society disturbing. It is at once too http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png The Good Society Penn State University Press

Response to Critics

The Good Society , Volume 15 (3) – Jan 7, 2007

Loading next page...
 
/lp/penn-state-university-press/response-to-critics-x0WhQOo0I9
Publisher
Penn State University Press
Copyright
Copyright © 2006 by The Pennsylvania State University. All rights reserved.
ISSN
1538-9731
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

O N P L U R A L I S M A N D L I B E R A L D E M O C R AC Y Richard E. Flathman I am grateful to the several contributors to this symposium I learned from his accounts, but so far as I can see there are no and to the journal editors for arranging it. The commentators are major differences between us. thoughtful and I have learned from them. I will respond briefly, Richard Boyd's article concentrates on my chapter on Michael beginning with Professor Kateb's paper. Oakeshott. Boyd clearly knows Oakeshott very well and I read his Kateb makes valuable distinctions among types of pluralism piece as for the most part complementary to mine. He correctly and argues forcefully that some of the types are mutually observes that I don't do much of anything with the notion, central incompatible. I did attempt a general theory and closer attention to Oakeshott, of civility and civil. That was deliberate. I have to his distinctions would have improved found the recent literature on civil the book. I think the value of the book, society disturbing. It is at once too

Journal

The Good SocietyPenn State University Press

Published: Jan 7, 2007

There are no references for this article.