Book Review: Kevin Vallier, Liberal Politics and Public Faith: Beyond Separation
| Author | Matteo Bonotti |
| Published date | 01 February 2017 |
| Date | 01 February 2017 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/1478929916676932 |
| Subject Matter | Book ReviewsPolitical Theory |
96 Political Studies Review 15 (1)
major role in the book. He says that ‘Given its
close association with the events that led to the
cultural turn, it would be reasonable to suggest
that Hayek’s epistemic brand of liberalism may
also be well-suited to engage with political
theory of post-socialism’ (p. 10). Tebble
extracts insights not only from Hayek but also
from other thinkers in this tradition in order to
tackle some questions of liberalism in terms of
ethnicity, linguistics, religion and multicultural-
ism.
The book provides an excellent account of
cultural diversity in modern societies and their
underlying principle of justice. Tebble’s argu-
ments in both criticising liberalism and con-
structing an alternative view are clear and
rather insightful. Although I imagine that the
book is not written for undergraduate students,
I recommend the book to those who have some
knowledge and are also interested in Hayek,
liberalism and multiculturalism.
Aref Ebadi
(University of Nottingham)
© The Author(s) 2016
Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1478929916676931
journals.sagepub.com/home/psrev
Liberal Politics and Public Faith: Beyond
Separation by Kevin Vallier. Abingdon:
Routledge, 2014. 286pp., £90.00 (h/b), ISBN
9780415737135
In Liberal Politics and Public Faith: Beyond
Separation, Kevin Vallier focuses on the debate
between public reason liberals, for whom citi-
zens ought to refrain from employing religious
arguments in public deliberation (chapter 1),
and religious critics, for whom this restraint
undermines the integrity of religious citizens
and treats them (i.e. as opposed to secular citi-
zens) unfairly (chapter 2). Both groups, Vallier
argues, share the misguided conviction that
restraint necessarily follows from the ‘Public
Justification Principle (PIP)’, that is, the view
that ‘coercion is permissible only when each
member of the public has sufficient reason to
endorse the coercion’ (p. 4). However, and this
is the book’s central claim, Vallier argues
(chapter 3) that the PIP does not imply restraint
since its foundational values, that is, ‘respect
for integrity’ (p. 87) and ‘recognition of rea-
sonable pluralism’ (p. 88), allow rather than
hinder the use of religious arguments in public
deliberation, thus signalling a common ground
between public reason liberals and religious
critics.
Vallier then endorses a ‘convergence’ con-
ception of public justification (chapter 4), for
which coercive legislation is justified as long
as each citizen has intelligible reasons for it
which are grounded in their (i.e. rather than in
publicly shared) evaluative standards. In order
to be consistent with the PIP, Vallier claims, the
convergence view needs to be accompanied by
a moderately rather than radically idealised
view of citizens (chapter 5) which does not
abstract away from their deepest beliefs.
Chapters 6 and 7 conclude the book by
showing how the convergence account of pub-
lic justification demands, on the one hand, a
broad use of religious accommodations for
religious citizens and, on the other hand, a
voucher-based educational system which
respects the diversity of parents’ preferences
and values and helps them protect their chil-
dren from a homogenising public education.
The most problematic aspect of the book is
Vallier’s endorsement of an ‘indirect approach
to public justification’ (p. 128), which imposes
restraint only on public officials (e.g. legisla-
tors and judges), given their greater influence
on coercive legislation, but not on ordinary
citizens. While this approach is plausible, it
renders Vallier’s adoption of the convergence
account of public justification somehow redun-
dant, since the indirect approach already
relieves citizens of the duty of restraint.
Apart from this flaw, this is a well-written
and thought-provoking book which will be of
interest to legal and political theorists, philoso-
phers and anyone interested in the complex
relationship between politics and religion.
Matteo Bonotti
(Cardiff University)
© The Author(s) 2016
Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1478929916676932
journals.sagepub.com/home/psrev
To continue reading
Request your trial