Within the context of the debate about religious symbolism in secular state schools stemming from the 1989 incident involving the expulsion of 3 schoolgirls in France for wearing the traditional Muslim headscarf, this debate is considered here as a form of philosophical engagement with more general principles of toleration, neutrality, & citizenship. Focus is on a central concept invoked in the headscarves debate -- laicite -- best translated as "secularism." The origins of the concept are traced to the French Revolution, describing how it became the official doctrine of the Third Republic (1870-1940) & guided the development of secular state primary education in the 1880s & the subsequent disestablishment of the Catholic Church. Three somewhat different meanings of laicite are identified -- neutrality, autonomy, & community -- & the use of each across French history is demonstrated. It is argued that the headscarves debate became so excessively problematic because it challenged all three of these meanings of laicite simultaneously. K. Hyatt Stewart
The underlying concept of multiculturalism in many European discussions is different from that made prominent by the classic cases, e.g. in Canada, that have functioned as paradigm cases which the most prominent theories of multiculturalism have been tailored to fit and justify. "Euro-multiculturalism" denotes a) a different object of debates, i.e. the kind of diversity that multiculturalism is about, b) a different definition of what counts as multiculturalism policy responses to this diversity, and c) a different normative background explaining what is at stake in European multiculturalism controversies. Euro-multiculturalism is a) about mainly immigrant religious minorities rather than indigenous or national minorities defined in mainly cultural or linguistic terms; b) does not for the most part consist in special group-differentiated rights or forms of recognition going beyond established liberal rights, but rather is concerned with the interpretation and application of standard liberal rights and rules to cases involving this new diversity; and c) should be understood as premised on an underlying discussion about the meaning of liberalism rather than as a debate about normative commitments fundamentally different from liberalism. The paper considers two objections to the proposed understanding of Euro-multiculturalism, namely a) that it over-inclusive in the sense that it includes religion as a central category and thereby neglects important differences between religion and culture, and b) that it is under-inclusive in the sense that it collapses multiculturalism into standard liberal political theory and fails to explain what is distinctive about multiculturalism. Finally the paper shows that multiculturalism in this sense can involve issues of toleration. ; The underlying concept of multiculturalism in many European discussions is different from that made prominent by the classic cases, e.g. in Canada, that have functioned as paradigm cases which the most prominent theories of multiculturalism have been tailored to fit and justify. "Euro-multiculturalism" denotes a) a different object of debates, i.e. the kind of diversity that multiculturalism is about, b) a different definition of what counts as multiculturalism policy responses to this diversity, and c) a different normative background explaining what is at stake in European multiculturalism controversies. Euro-multiculturalism is a) about mainly immigrant religious minorities rather than indigenous or national minorities defined in mainly cultural or linguistic terms; b) does not for the most part consist in special group-differentiated rights or forms of recognition going beyond established liberal rights, but rather is concerned with the interpretation and application of standard liberal rights and rules to cases involving this new diversity; and c) should be understood as premised on an underlying discussion about the meaning of liberalism rather than as a debate about normative commitments fundamentally different from liberalism. The paper considers two objections to the proposed understanding of Euro-multiculturalism, namely a) that it over-inclusive in the sense that it includes religion as a central category and thereby neglects important differences between religion and culture, and b) that it is under-inclusive in the sense that it collapses multiculturalism into standard liberal political theory and fails to explain what is distinctive about multiculturalism. Finally the paper shows that multiculturalism in this sense can involve issues of toleration.
Why should we be tolerant? What does it mean to 'live and let live'? What ought to be tolerated and what not? Catriona McKinnon presents a comprehensive, yet accessible introduction to toleration in her new book. Divided into two parts, the first clearly introduces and assesses the major theoretical accounts of toleration, examining it in light of challenges from scepticism, value pluralism and reasonableness. The second part applies the theories of toleration to contemporary debates such as female circumcision, French Headscarves, artistic freedom, pornography and censorship, and holocaust denial. Drawing on the work of philosophers, such as Locke, Mill and Rawls, whose theories are central to toleration, the book provides a solid theoretical base to those who value toleration, whilst considering the challenges toleration faces in practice. It is the ideal starting point for those coming to the topic for the first time, as well as anyone interested in the challenges facing toleration today.
